Skip to main content

Full text of "The colonization of the West Bank territories by Israel : hearings before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-fifth Congress, first session ... October 17 and 18, 1977"

See other formats














OCTOBER 17 AND 18, 1977 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 


Concord. New Hampshire 03301 

ON DEPOSIT ^'^"^ ' " '^^^ 


U^< ll'^l/^r^f'^ 














OCTOBER 17 AND 18, 1977 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

:o\ DOCS 







Concord. New Hampshire 03301 

ON DEPOSIT ^^ ' ' ^^^^ 


Sosfe^ '^' •'-''-> ^J!3ra^y 






JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi, Chairman 

JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 
BIRCH BAYH, Indiana 
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia 
JAMES ABOUREZK, Soiitli Dakota 
JAMES B. ALLEN, Alabama 
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JK., Delaware 

STROM THURMOND, South Carolina 

Francis C. Rosenberger, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization 

JAMES EASTLAND, Mississippi, Chairtnan 


EDWARD KENNEDY, Massachusetts 





Senator Abourezk 1 


October 17, 1977 

Shahak, Israel, professor, Hebrew University 2 

Blum, Yehuda Zvi, professor, Hebrew University 24 

Mallison, W. T., professor. The George Washington University 46 

October 18, 1977 

Tamari, Salim, professor, Birzeit College 73 

Dakkak, Ibrahim, engineer, Jerusalem 81 

Al-Asmar, Fawzi, poet, Jerusalem 109 


Basic outline of Israeli Minister of Agriculture Ariel Sharon's settlement 

plan 12 

Lists and maps of existing Israeli settlements on the West Bank, Golan, 

Sinai and the Gaza Strip (as of August 1977) 13 

A survey of Israeli settlements prepared by the Middle East Research and 

Information Project 57 

The Middle East Research and Information Project's paper on Israeli 

settlement policy 65 

Article on Palestinian political prisoners 90 

Article on some aspects of Israel's annexationist policies regarding Jeru- 
salem and the occupied territories 103 

Article 49 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian 

Persons in Time of War 115 

Testimony of Alfred L. Atherton, Jr., Assistant Secretary of State for the 
Near East and South Asia before the House International Relations 
Subcommittee on International Organizations 115 

Israeli Minister of Agriculture Ariel Sharon's plan for settlements aa re- 
ported by the Jerusalem Post, SeptemV^er 12, 1977 117 

An interview with Ariel Sharon in the Jerusalem Post, September 9, 1977_ 121 

Article on Israeli land acquisition, 1967-77 by John Ruedy 124 

Jerusalem Post article on plans of the Jewish Agency Settlement Depart- 
ment, September 12, 1977 127 

A collection of articles from other Israeli newspapers on settlements in the 

occupied territories 131 

Report issued by the International Committee for Palestinian Human 
Rights in Paris on State Department reporting of Israeli human rights 
violations 142 

Collection of Israeli newspaper articles on the persecution of Black Hebrews 

in Israel 163 

Letter giving eyewitness accounts of two incidents involving treatment of 

detainees in Jerusalem by Israeli police -- 165 

Israeli news articles about Arabs in the occupied territories who work in 

Israel 166 

Article by Felicia Langer on Palestinian children in the occupied terri- 
tories --- 170 

Report on oppression in Ramallah and El-Bireh in the occupied territories, 

March 1977 by Israel Shahak and Eytan Grosfeld 173 

A report on violations of human rights in the West Bank prepared by tie 

Swiss League for Human Rights observation mission 179 





U.S. Senate, 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Nationalization, 

Committee on the Judiciary, 

Washington^ D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice at 10:05 a.m., in room 
6202, Dirksen Senate Office Building, James Abourezk (acting chair- 
man of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present : Senator Abourezk. 

Staff present : Wendy Grieder, legislative assistant. 

Senator Abourezk. The hearing will come to order. 

Before I make an opening statement I would like to make an 

The hearings tomorrow will be held in a different room on this 
floor at 10 o'clock in the morning in room 6226. It is just down the 
hall on the same floor of this building. 

The witnesses tomorrow will be Mr. Salim Tamari, professor of 
sociology at Birzeit University, and Mr. Ibrahim Dakkak, an engineer 
by profession and a resident of Jerusalem who has specialized in 
research on the status of Jerusalem. 


This is a public hearing by the Senate Judiciary's Subcommittee 
on Immigration and Refugees. This subcommittee has as its respon- 
sibility the problems of refugees, and nowhere is there a greater 
group of refugees existing than in the Middle East. Some 3 million 
Palestinian refugees comprise the Palestinian diaspora, a result of 
having been driven from their homeland in 1948 by the military 
forces of what is now the State of Israel. Many of these are double 
refugees, having been driven out of Palestine in 1948 and again 
fleeing in 1967 when Israel further expanded as a result of the war 
in June of that year. 

The issue facing the U.S. Government at this time is how we will 
use our influence to bring the parties involved in the Middle East 
conflict to a reasonable and just settlement of the controversy. A key 
to that settlement of whether or not the Palestinian refugees \vill 
eventually be able to establish a state of their own, of a kind of which 
they were deprived by the acquisition by force of arms of their lands 
by Israel in 1948. 


The area largely conceded to be a logical site for such a Palestin- 
ian State is what is called the West Bank of the Jordan River, now 
under Israeli military occupation. However, a number of Jewish 
settlements have been implanted in the occupied territories by Israel, 
with a great many more planned. This creation of "new facts" not only 
is in violation of international law and the United Nations Charter, 
but it makes more difficult an already difficult situation. 

The question really comes down to this : in 1977, at a time when the 
nations of the world have totally abandoned their colonies and their 
colonial ambitions; when the American people and its government are 
applying pressure on Rhodesia and South Africa to allow majority 
rule ; should the United States underwrite the creation of a whole new- 
system of colonies by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories? 

For myself the answer is that it should not. These hearings will 
hopefully provide an answer to this question for the country as a 

Our first witness this morning is the distinguished professor of 
cTiemistry at Hebrew University, Dr. Israel Shahak, a citizen of 
Israel and resident of Jerusalem. 

Dr. Shahak, would you come up to the witness table please? 

I believe you have an opening statement. If you would like to pro- 
ceed we would like to welcome you to the subcommittee hearings and 
ask you to begin with your testimony. 



Dr. Shahak. I would like to concentrate not on questions of law 
but on questions of justice and questions of the day-to-day situation 
of particular conquered territories. Those questions of justice, basic 
justice as can be understood by every citizen and every fair human 
being and I will also speak on the situation induced b}' the settlements 
of the people of the conquered territories. 

First of all, I would like to point out that the creation of the settle- 
ments in a territory, whose inhabitants tlien cannot settle in the state 
which settles this territory violates, in my opinion, the right of equal 
justice, the right which says that the people should be treated under 
equal law. I oppose both inside the State of Israel and in every place 
and in every forum of the world the statement of my Prime Minister, 
Mr. Begin, that Jews have the right to settle in the land of Israel 
because riglits should be given irrespective of religion, race, and 

As I said in my own country, I say here that if the Jews of Tel 
Aviv have the right to settle on the West Bank, then they have it only 
under conditions that a mutual and equal right should be given to all 
the people, let us say, people of the West Bank to settle in Tel Aviv. 

Every other situation violates the conditions of freedom as known in 
modern states and violates the veiy i)rinciples establislied by the 
American Revolution and of the French Revolution and the most 
fimdamental rulcvS of a modern democracy. It returns us to the prin- 
ciples which were euiployed by anti-Semites against Jews. I say this 
esj>ecially as a Jew. The settling of the territories under this unjust 

and unequal law reminds me very much the situation of Jews who had 
suffered in European and other countries until the end of the 18th cen- 
tury and sometimes later, when they were not allowed to settle where 
they wished but were kept in certain areas or in ghettos. 

Allowing only the Jews of Israel to settle in territories and not al- 
lowing the people of these territories to settle in Israel under the 
mutual and equal right resembles to me such j^ersecution of Jews. 

I say, furthermore, that we should not have used the words "Israeli 
settlements" on the "\Vest Bank as we have here on this map [indicat- 
ing] because, as is known to everybody in Israel, only Jews are allowed 
to settle in those settlements, and not Israelis. 

As a matter of recorded fact, neither people of the conquered ter- 
ritories nor Israeli citizens who are not Jews are allowed to settle in 
the settlements on the West Bank or in Gaza or in the territory of 
Golan or Sinai. 

Tliis constitutes the most blatant and open racism, both toward the 
people of the occupied territories who are not allowed to dwell and to 
live in state-fonned settlements established on their own land and 
also toward those Israeli citizens who do not happen to be Jews. 

In addition, this also constitutes an act of racism against the Ameri- 
can citizens, and a matter of fact, against citizens of the whole world. 
We have a situation in which Americans are invited to settle in the 
West ]3ank, in the Gaza Strip, or on the Sinai Territoi*y, or in Golan 
and other places but only on the condition that they are Jews. This 
means in law and in practice that an American citizen in order to 
benefit from those very high material incentives offered to settlers in 
those territories must either be converted to the Jewish religion and 
one of the conditions, is denying the religion of his ancestors or show- 
ing that he is born of a Jewish mother, grandmother, great grand- 
mother, and the grandmother of the grandmother. 

I say this not only as a human l>eing but as a Jew that if the Ameri- 
can Government would establish such settlements whether in Alaska 
or Puerto Rico, I would have protested and if Jews were required in 
ordei- to participate in those American settlements to deny their faith 
and accept, for example, the divinity of Jesus Christ, then this would 
in my opinion constitute the most blatant case of anti-Semitism. Even 
so and by the same i-easoning, settlements which are open only to such 
Americans citizens, who are Jews or who convert to Judaism and deny 
the faith of their ancestors, constitute equally a case of racism. 

Lastly, I want to point to this: Those settlements are serving as 
centers of the most blatant and horrifying child labor and exploita- 
tion employing unjust and unequal wages. I want especially to draw 
the attention of this committee to the horrible and shocking case of 
cheap labor in the area called Pithat Rafiah — in Hebrew and in Eng- 
lish Rafiah Approaches — in the northAvestern corner of the Sinai on 
Egyptian territory, where, as I can t^tify from the evidence of my 
own eyes, confirmed by many Israelis, for example. Dr. Amnon 
Kapelink, who has published his findings in the French and Hebrew 
press. Children of an age of 7 or 8 years are employed at picking 
tomatoes and other vegetables. Whole families are employed under 
the conditions of slave labor. And even for those who are employed 
not under those conditions of slave labor, an Arab laborer is officially 

offered 5 Israeli pounds per hour, while wages for "Jewish labor" 
would be 12.5 Israeli pounds per hour. 

Although the conditons in this area are the most shocking, I want 
to point out that the same conditons are prevalent in other places. 
I want to point to another place, both by my own inspection and by 
data given by Mr. Mayeski, the superintendent of Kiryat-Arba, on 
the 16th of September in Haaretz, specially built to exploit cheap 
Arab labor and it offers 5 to 5.5 Israeli pounds per hour. The ordi- 
nary wages ai-e much higher. 

To summarize, I believe that all people in all countries of the 
world should call for immediate and total abolishment of all the 
settlements in conquered territories as sources of injustice, of I'acism, 
of exploitation, and of oppression. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator Abourezk. Your prepared statement will be inserted in 
the record at this point. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Shahak follows :] 

Prepared Statement of Dr. Israel Shahak 


I am an Israeli citizen interested in human rights. From March 1970 until 
the present day, I have served as the chairman of the Israeli League for Human 
and Civil Rights. The last time I was elected to this post, together with the 
members of our executive committee, was on February 20, 1977. The League is 
composed solely of Israeli citizens. 

In this capacity and previously as an individual, I have been very interested 
in the nature of the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Not only 
have I followed very carefully the reports in the Hebrew press, but I have also 
made a point of visiting most (perhaps all; I cannot be sure) settlements a 
short time after their founding. In the case of the more important settlements. 
I have repeated my visits, usually once a year or more often, and I have tried 
to investigate the nature of the settlements, using all possible sources of 

1. violations of international law and of human rights which occur 
because of the settlements in the occupied territories 

I will not elaborate on the question of International Law, beyond pointing 
out again that the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. which is supposed to be 
the governing document in cases of conquered territories, prohibits totally the 
settling of territories conquered by a state with settlers who are citizens of this 

I will concentrate more on the violation of human rights involved in this 
settlement process. The two most significant aspects of those violations appear 
to be the confiscation of the land, carried out in a particularly cruel and unjust 
way, and the creation of a regime of inequality and racist discrimination. 

A. The land on ivhich the settlement in the occupied territories arc fovnded 
In all the countries which were a part of the old Ottoman Ehipire, a consider- 
able part of the land was held in common for the benefit of the local population 
of a given village in the name of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. Such land, 
which really corresponded to the English "commons" land, was used either for 
pasture or for other common purposes of the villagers such as religious build- 
ings. Under the successor states of this Empire, this land became "government" 
land, without changing its functions. The military government of the occupied 
territories has devoted this land, in principle and in fact, to the uses of the 
Israeli settlements only, without any regard to tlie fact that it has served the 
existing population of the conquered territories from time immemorial. More- 
over, this use is racist use. Although the settlements are called "Israeli" in 
name, they are exclusively Jewish in fact. No Israeli citizen who is not a Jew, 

and of course no inhabitant of the occupied territories, is allowed to "settle" in 
those settlements, while Jews from all over the world are invited to settle there, 
merely because they are Jews. Such behavior usually has a name — which is, 
racist discrimination. 

A second "source" of land for settlements are the lands belonging to the so- 
called "absentees". Those are inhabitants of the occupied territories who are 
living outside, whether they were expelled or deported or left of fheir own 
free will or were by chance out of their homes when the 1967 war broke out 
and were not allowed to return. In all those cases the land which they may have 
owned is confiscated by the military government and devoted to the purposes of 
"Israeli" — really Jewish — settlement. Even in cases where a father dies and 
his son, the heir is abroad and can not return, this procedure is followed. 

The third "source" is sales, or rather forced sales, made by the inhabitants 
of the conquered territories to the Israel Land Authority or to the Jewish Na- 
tional Fund. I call those sales "forced" because they quite often take place in 
the oflBces of the military government and under the threats of the military 
governor and his representatives. If the threats are not enough, then one of two 
things happens to the inhabitant who refuses to "sell" his ancestral land : 
Either he, or a close member of his family, is arrested and held in prison for 
long periods of time until the sale is agreed to ; or, the land in dispute is de- 
clared to be a "closed area" on which cultivation or building of houses are for- 
bidden. It should be mentioned that such prohibition is absolute. In two cases, 
Azariyeh (which is a short distance east of Jerusalem) and Hebron, the owners 
of the land which was declared "closed" attempted to dedicate it to religious 
purposes by trying to build mosques on it. The foundations of those mosques 
were razed to the ground, on the orders of the military government, as illegal. 

B. Creation of a regime of inequality and discrimination 

It is in the nature of natural justice, and it is implied in the equality of human 
beings, that one human being should not have more rights than another because 
of his birth or of his being converted to a particular religion. However, as the 
Israeli Prime Minister Mr. Begin has declared. "Jews have the right to settle 
in the area of the 'Land of Israel.' " The "Land of Israel" is a territory which 
includes now the area of the state of Israel in its June 6, 1967 borders and all 
the territories occupied by the state of Israel beyond borders. Under this 
declaration and in actual fact, Jews living in the area of the state of Israel have 
the right to settle in the occupied territories, but the inhabitants of those terri- 
tories have no corresponding right to .settle in Israel. In fact, the situation is at 
least theoretically worse than it is in South Africa, because there, on paper at 
least, the whites are not allowed to settle in the "black" territory and the blacks 
in the "white" one. Here, we have one group of human beings allowed to live 
where they please, merely because they were born Jews or converted to the 
Jewish religion, and a second one not only denied a mutual right, but even 
squeezed out of their territory. To Illustrate this by some examples : An Amer- 
ican citizen who fulfills one of the two conditions — either he shows proof that he 
is born of a Jewish mother (and of three other female ancestors) or that he is 
converted to Judaism — can immediately come to settle either in Tel Aviv or in 
the Bank, for example. An American citizen who does not fulfill either 
of those conditions can not, by right, settle in either place, even if he was bom 
in Palestine. An Israeli citizen wlio is not a Jew can not .settle in the settle- 
ments in the occupied territories. An inhabitant of the territories who is not a 
Jew cannot settle in Tel Aviv, for example, although Jew.s of Tel Aviv can 
settle in the territories. 


Since some statements have been made outside Israel which place the per- 
manency of the Israeli settlements in some doubt, let me state here unequivocally 
that the general nature of the statements of purpose made by the ministers most 
responsible in the Israeli government, and by the highest officials of the Jewish 
Agency (the body that bears the major part of the costs of the .settlements) is 
such as to leave no doubt about the intention of keeping the areas where Israeli 
.settlements were founded as a permanent part of the state of Israel. 

To give only two examples : The very title of the last settlement plan of 
General Ariel Sharon is, "A vision of Israel at century's end", and it is clearly 


implied there that all the settlements described there will remain a part of the 
state of Israel (Jerusalem Post, September 9, 1977). On the same day, in an 
interview with Ma'ariv, General Sharon, the Israeli minister of agriculture and 
the minister in charge of the settlements in the occupied territories, stated, 
speaking about the settlements on the Golan Heights, "There is absolutely no 
disagreement between me and the Prime Minister. It is only a matter of formula- 
tion. No disagreement. There is absolutely no possibility of retreat on the Golan. 
Not in the common use of the word. One might correct the border here and 
there, a matter of a few hundred meters, and I emphasize, no more. And even such 
border-corrections cannot be done everywhere, but only in a limited number 
of places. That it is. Absolutely not more. There is no disagreement. In contrast 
to the former governments, this one is new in not having disagreements and 
rivalries among the ministers. There are differences of opinions, differences of 
formulation, but the government acts as one body and has one stand" (Ma'ariv, 
September 9, 1977). 

Similarly declared Professor Ra'anan Weitz, the Director of the Settlements 
Department of the Jewish Agency, on September 2, 1977, when questioned as 
follows : 

Question. "Is the meaning of a new settlement that we shall not move from 
that place?" 

Answer (of Professor Weitz). "Yes. Surely. According to my opinion of a new 
settlement that is founded, one is prohibited from leaving that place." (Yedioth 
Aharonot, September 2, 1977) 


There are in my opinion two chief reasons for the Israeli settlements in the 
occupied territories and only those : The establishment of new frontiers for the 
state of Israel, and the holding down of the Arab population of the occupied 
territories in a state of permanent subjugation. The first, which has been re- 
ferred to above, is to establish the future permanent border of the state of Israel 
in the consciousness of the Israeli Jews first of all ; in the consciousness of the 
Diaspora Jews who are providing .some of the money involved ; and finally be 
creating "faits accomplis" in the eyes of world opinion to finish this process. 

In this connection the plan of the "inland population strip" as enunciated by 
General Sharon (Jerusalem Post, September 9, 1977) and which was based on 
plans proposed informally at a year before, clearly shows the "Greater 
Israel" with a heavily populated eastern border "extending from the Golan, 
through the Jordan Rift Valley, the Arava and down to Sharm el-Sheikh" (ibid). 

But there exists a second reason for the settlements, a reason as important 
as the first : To divide the Arabs of the occupied territories into small segments, 
divide one from another by the "lines" or "wedges" of Jewish settlements, in order 
to make them "manageable" for the future of permanent subjugation. It should 
be clearly stated and as clearly understood that for General Sharon, the Israeli 
minister in charge of the settlements, Arabs constitute a danger just because 
they are Arabs and for no additional reason. For example the sole reason for 
"the insertion of a wedge of Israeli settlements" on "the western slopes of 
Samaria" is given as the presence of "a string of Arab villages", inside the area 
of the state of I.srael, whose population numbers close to 100,000. and "another 
band of dense Arab .settlements" which also numbers "close to 100,000 inhabi- 
tants" on the other side of the former green line" (my emphasis, but Sharon's 
expression ! ) . The .sole purpose of inserting this "wedge" of Jewisli settlements 
is "the danger", as General Sharon says, of one block of Arabs joining the other 
block. It is especially imiwrtant to note that one of the "blocks" of Arabs which 
constitutes "a danger" according to General Sharon, is composed of Israeli citi- 
zens, whose danger consists apparently in the fact that they do not happen to be 
Jews, and this racist argument is then used as the reason for the establLshment 
of a "wedge" of Jewish .settlements. (All quotations from Jerusalem Post, Sep- 
tember 9, 1977). The same argument appears in another similar description of 
Sharon's settlement plans in Ma'ariv of September 1, 1977, where the reason for 
establishing Jewish settlements in this area is given as "to prevent such Arab 
continuity". The height of this racLst approach was reached by General Sharon 
in an interview with Ma'ariv on September 9, 1977, in which Arabs generally were 
stigmatised as "strangers" who steal the "national lands" — the clear implication 
being that Arabs, whether Israeli citizens or not are forever strangers in their 
own country, in which they were born, and that only .lews should be allowed and 
encouraged to "settle" on state lands, whether in Israel or in the occupied 

In my opinion, it is this racist approacli which is the strongest reason for the 
plans of settlements of the present Israeli government. 


Although a minority of the Jewish settlers in the occupied territories are drawn 
there for "ideological" reasons, it should be clearly explained that the Israeli gov- 
ernment employs a variety of material incentives — given only to Jews, of course, 
but to Jews from all countries of the world — in order to induce them to settle in 
the occupied territories. Other material benefits are given by the Jewish Agency 
and the Jewish National Fund, actually employing to a large extent money col- 
lected in the USA as "charity" and as such deductible from US income tax. 

As the most important example of such material Incentives let me quote the 
very much reduced apartment prices offered in the town of Yamit — in Egyptian 
territory, in north-western Sinai — according to the advertisement of the Israeli 
Ministry of Building and Housing, of September 2, 1977. From a variety of apart- 
ments and cottages offered in this ad, I am selecting the most expensive and the 
cheapest examples : "A cottage built in a row, of 5 rooms, area of 113 square 
meters, with a courtyard" will cost 270,000 Israeli Pounds (about $26,000). Of 
this sum, a family which does not have an apartment in Israel can get 100,000 
LP. in a government loan which is not tied to the inflation rate (which under 
the conditions of up to 40 percent rate of yearly inflation prevalent in Israel is 
more a gift than a loan), 25,000 LP. in the form of a "conditional grant" (con- 
ditional on the recipient's remaining some years in the settlement) and in addi- 
tion a loan, under unspecified conditions, of 30,000 LP. All together, the loans and 
the grants can amount to 155,000 LP., so that the remaining sum to be paid will be 
only 115,000 LP. (about $12,000). For comparison's sake, in the area of Tel Aviv 
such a cottage can cost from 500,000 to 1,(>00,000 LP., with all the housing loans 
tied to inflation, and with a much higher proportion of the sum to be paid at 

The cheapest apartment in Yamit, of 3 rooms and of 82 square meters, in a 
house of three stories high, costs 175,000 LP., of which the same total sum of 
155,000 LP. can be obtained in the form of government loans or grants. This 
leaves a sum of 20,000 LP. ($1900 approximately) for the settler to pay for 
receiving such an apartment as his absolute property. 

Another example can be given about the prices of apartments in Kiryat Arba 
on the West Bank. The figures come from an article by Shimshon Ehrlich in 
Ha'aretz of September 16, 1977, and they are given by oflScial Israeli sources. Mr. 
Ehrlich notes that the prices of the apartments in Kiryat Arba have not changed 
"for a long time", in spite of the Israeli inflation which affects the prices of 
everything inside Israel. An apartment with four rooms, of 96 square meters, is 
being sold for the price of 180,000 LP., in Kiryat Arba, and one with three 
rooms of 86 square meters for 160,000 LP. A government loan of 100,000 LP. and 
a grant of 35,000 LP. are available, so that one can buy an apartment for the sum 
of 25,000 LP. (some $2,300). In spite of this and of the excellent conditions 
under which the settlers are required to repay the loans, most of the settlers have 
obtained another and better concession : They are not required to buy their 
apartments at all, but they are renting them for the maximum sum of 300 LP. 
(about $28) a month, which is probably a third of the rent for a similar apart- 
ment in Tel Aviv. 

In spite of such material incentives, the number of apartments, cottages, and 
other housing built by the Israeli government remains greater than the number 
of settlers. In order to .solve this "problem" two of the officials of the Israeli 
government in charge of Kiryat Arba, Mr. Mayevsky, the director of the admin- 
istration, and Mr. Shtrasberg, who is in charge of absorption there, have pro- 
posed that the Israeli government should cease all government building of 
houses, or governmental help for housing in "the center of Israel" (meaning 
around Tel Aviv) in order to force people to settle in the occupied territories 
whether they want to or not (Ha'aretz, September 16). In my opinion something 
or the other of this kind will probably be attempted soon. 


The most shocking area of child labor, and general exploitation of workers 
under conditions resembling slavery, is the north-western Sinai area (on Egyp- 
tian territory) called the "Rafah Approaches", and in Hebrew "Pithat Rafi'ah". 
There, as I can testify from the evidence of my own eyes, and as confirmed by 


many Israelis and others, children, sometimes as young as 7 or 8 years old, are 
employed habitually by the Jewish settlers of this area, who have become very 
rich indeed in the short span of about three years. The "ofBcial" wage of an 
adult worker is given by the regional settlements-council "Eshkol", which com- 
prises both the settlements in this area and settlements inside Israel, as "12.5 
I.P. per hour of labor, 5 I.P. per hour of Arab labor." Of course Arab children 
are paid much less than this, and some of the payments, both for the children 
and for the adults, are made in kind, by "unloading" on them the most rotten 
produce of the fields in which they work instead of monetary payment! The 
people who are treated so are Egyptian citizens who were expelled from the 
places where they lived for supix)sed "security" reasons, but who are allowed, 
indeed encouraged, to work on their old lands under the conditions of more-than- 
feudal bondage to the settlers. Whole families, including children, are enslaved 
to a particular settler, and are working for him under the most atrocious 

Although the conditions in this area are particularly horrible, the difference 
in the -wages between Israeli citizens (including of the Jewish .settlers in 
the occupied territories) and the native inhabitants of the territories is both 
intentional and general. For example, Mr. Mayevsky. the official in charge of 
Kiryat Arba, referred to in the former section, explained that "a textile plant, 
which was built on the basis of a wage of 5 to 5.5 I.P. per hour was built from 
its beginning for employing Arabs (my emphasis) because Jews will not agree 
to work for such a wage." In my opinion many similar plants or settlements 
were built with the help and encouragement of the Israeli government in order to 
exploit the labor of the inhabitants of the occupied territories under condi- 
tions of near-slavery, and of course without any possibility of the formation 
of trade unions of any kind. 


The Israeli settlements in the occupied territories constitute by their very 
existence a violation of the most basic human rights and of international law. 
Their purpose is expansion and the permanent subjugation of the population of 
those territories. They are a source of discrimination, racism, and oppression. 
In the interest of all the parties to the conflict, including the best interests of the 
Israeli citizens, those settlements should go, and be abolished as soon as possible. 
Otherwise, in addition to being a source of corruption to all. they will also 
become one of the main causes of the next war in the Middle East. 

Senator Abourezk. Thank you very much. 

I am fully aware that you don't like to trade on your background as 
a means of establishing yourself as a spokesman for your point of view 
but I think it is necessary to put it on the record. 

Would you tell the conunittee something about your background? 

Dr. SnAiiAK. T was born in Warsaw, Poland, in 1933. I spent World 
War II under Hitler's occupation. I have arrived in Palestine in 1945 
and I am from that time a permanent resident first of Palestine and 
then a citizen of the State of Israel. I almost always lived there as a 
part of two periods of postdoctorate or sabbatical research. 

Senator Abourezk. I know that you have come to the United States 
before. In fact, I met you 3 or 4 years ago. I can't recall the exact 
date, but perhaps you can. I think I mentioned at the time that the 
way you spoke out against the continued expansion of Israel must 
have caused you great difficulty in Israel. You said at the time that it 
caused you less difficulty there than it did here in the United States. 
I wonder if that is still true. 

Dr. SiiAHAK. Even more true. I am happy to say that for the last 
21/^ years or more there has been no difficulty whatsoever in the State 
of Israel. The difficulties from the United States continue, but I will 
bear them. 

Senator Abourezk. What exactly happens when you come to the 
United States to speak your opinion here ? 


Dr Shahak. Very simple. If I am sponsored by a church group, 
then usually all the Jewish organizations in a given city are putting 
pressure on this church group to revoke my sponsorship even at the 

last moment. . Ti. • .c n -p i;^c 

Also, anonymous literature is circulated against me. it is lull ot lies. 
There are no dates and addresses given. i t -n 

Those examples should suffice. They are political and general. I will 
not talk about American individuals and so on. They have their rights 
to express their opinions even if those are abusive opinions. 

Senator Abourezk. Do you find yourself subject to harassment when 
you are speaking around the United States on this issue ? 

Dr. Shahak. Very much so. i u i q 

Senator Abourezk. What kind of harassment and by whom < 
Dr. Shahak. I do not know by whom. I do not employ an apparatus 
of spies who can find who those people are, but I would say this : Those 
people who I have identified are coming from the special organiza- 
tions and the chief organization which is employed m harassing me 
is B'nai B'rith and the so-called Anti-Defamation League. 

Senator Abourezk. The B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League ? 

Dr. Shahak. Yes. • j -j ^ 

Senator Abourezk. Do you know of any other groups or individuals 
who might be a party to the harassment of you as you go around and 
speak ? 

Dr. Shahak. No. 

Senator Abourezk. I would like to direct your attention to this 
map. [Map shown.] 

We have gotten this map from the State Department. As I under- 
stand it those are the existing settlements which have been established 
in the West Bank to this date. 

I wonder if you have personally been to any of those settlements. 

Dr. Shahak. I can say firmly that those are the settlements estab- 
lished until around the first of August. Meanwhile there have been 
others. I think I have visited every settlement shown here with the 
exception of Nahal Rehan and I visited most of them more than one 

Senator Abourezk. I wonder if you would describe the political 
setup in the settlements and give us a description of what goes on 
when a settlement is established — like its physical and political char- 

Dr. Shahak. A settlement is usually first established as a military 
settlement and then you can inspect it from the outside and you cannot 

When it becomes a civilian settlement you can enter very easily and 
very freely. Some of the settlements are agricultural especially those 
that are near the Jordan River. Some others sometimes employ some 
industry. I must say that most of the industry there that I inspected 
are part of one town Ma'ale Adumim called also Mishor Adumim 
near Jerusalem. To give you one example, in a kibbutz called Na'aran 
the industry appears to be carpentry, mechanical carpentry, but they 
do not make finished products. It is a subbranch of another rich kib- 
butz Giv'at Brenner in Israel which sends wood there to be cut into 
logs. Then the wood is going back to the coast of the Mediterranean. 
This appears to me to be a ridiculously wasteful economic procedure. 


In another place a kibbutz called Meliota. the industry described 
to me and as I have seen it is making locks. Since it is on the top of the 
mountains it was very hard to make a road loading there and to see 
what they can do there. I quite question those locks. 

To give the most ridiculous example, Ofra has one of its main in- 
dustries, T-shirts, on which is written in P^nglish "Samaria is the Heart 
of the Land of Israel." 

I would say generally speaking that apart of Ma'ale Adumim and 
apart of Elazar south of Jerusalem — I did not see or hear of any 
serious industry. 

I have seen serious agriculture in all areas of the Jordan Valley. I 
especially want to mention Patsaiel which is veiy successful agricul- 
turally and all the settlements which are near to it, Massua and the 

Senator Abotjrezk. Is there any kind of a policy on the establish- 
ment of the location of the settlement or is it just clone by the settlers 
themselves ? 

Dr. Shahak. Oh, no. It is done by the Government. I do not believe 
apart from Kadum that any settlement was established by settlers 
themselves. There is also evidence as of now of an interview of Gen- 
eral Sharon of September 9 that there is complete undei-standing be- 
tween the settlers and the Government. 

The location of the existing settlements shown on the map as of the 
beginning of August shows in the northern West Bank two lines and 
you can see also a line which is the continuation of one of the lines 
towards the western bank of the Dead Sea. 

Senator Abourezk. ^Vh\ would the settlements be established in a 

Dr. Shahak. This is the Allon plan and now the Sharon plan 
which is intended to cut ojff a third of the so-called Samaria in order 
to leave only the western part as whatever it should have been left for. 

But by now, according to a map which is adjoined to the Sharon 
plan, the new settlements which are not shown on this map are cutting 
the West Bank into squares and are entering into the areas which 
on this map up here are more or less white and are dividing the pop- 
ulation of the West Bank into areas which should not have, according 
to Sharon, more than 100,000 inhabitants in a given area. This is the 
process of ghettoization which is my opinion shows the intention not 
only of permanent occupation but of permanent ghettoization, of 
keeping the population in permanent subjection by keeping them in 
squares whose lines will be the divisions of the settlements. This is 
not shown on this map. 

Senator Abourezk. The proposed settlements are not shown on this 

Dr. Shahak. The planned settlements and the settlements estab- 
lished in the last month are not shown on the map. This map is ac- 
cording to New York Times and Israeli sources. There were estab- 
lished in the last month, according to my count, 14 settlements at 
least, all of whom are not shown on this map. 

Senator Abourezk. Can you use a pencil and point out where those 
14 new settlements are going to go ? 

Dr. Shahak. No : because since thev were established when I was 
not in Israel — and I have been here for a month and I could not in- 
spect them personally. As I told you, all of those shown here with 


the exception of one were inspected personally by me. I can show 
the lines of the settlements because I have seen a map of them pub- 
lished in the Hebrew press. 

Senator Abourezk. Yes; if you would do that we would appreciate 
it. This map was actually drawn up by the CIA. Apparently the New 
York Times is ahead of the CIA. [Laughter.] 

Dr. Shahak. TVHiat I am referring to is Israeli television. I have 
seen this map. [Laughter.] 

There should be two lines of settlements going here [indicating] 
north to south, and three lines going east to west [indicating]. 

Senator Abourezk. So Israel is making a grid system ? 

Dr. Shahak. Exactly, and what will be between the lines is called 
"squares" — again, two lines going so and three lines going horizon- 
tally. And, in addition, cutting off the widening of Jerusalem and 
some settlements in the southern part here [indicating]. 

I will submit the map in evidence. 

Senator Abourezk. Do you have the map with you ? 

Dr. Shahak. I have the map with me. 

Senator Abourezk. I would like to have it put in the record. 

Dr. Shahak. I have the map with me. It is in Hebrew but I have put 
an English translation of the names and I will submit it. 

Senator Abourezk. At this time also we will put in the record a list 
of already existing settlements by name, date established, affiliation, 
and the estimated population of each of these settlements. 

[The map and material referred to follow :] 

Unsettled Areas 

A close look at the "Sharon plan" reveals that one of its basic tendencies is to 
avoid penetrating areas with existing Arab population, and establish settlements 
in areas, which are hardly populated. The planners consider the "Sharon plan" 
to be the practical answer to the present security problems, considering the 
Arab population on the one hand, and the Jewish population on the other, are 
situated on both sides of the green line. 

The "Sharon plan", which requires settling thousands of Jews in urban and 
agricultural centers in order to realize it, is being processed at the moment by 
planning teams under the instructions of the minister. 

The "Sharon plan", as it has become known as, is supposed to answer security 
needs, and concentrates on solving three main problems : 

1. Thickening the area of Jewish settlements in the Jerusalem-corridor. 

2. E.stablishing a complex of settlements in the area stretching west to the 
line of Genin. Nablus and Rammala. 

3. Planning a network of roads, at the center of Israel, from the sea in the 
west to the Jordan valley in the east. 

Warning From Retreat From the Golan Heights 

(Reported by Menahem Rabat) 

At a gathering at Merom Golan to mark ten years of settlement on the Golan 
Heights, the Minister of Agriculture, Ariel Sharon, said yesterday among other 
things, that "the Syrian take-over of Lebanon, with American support, caused a 
total change — to the the worse — in our situation in the north." 

"There are talks lately of territorial compromise, but from this stage I warn 
from any retreat from the Golan Heights. There is nowhere to retreat from on 
the Golan Heights." 

"Israel must take on herself a task, to be realized in 20 years ; to settle 2 
million Jews in the area alongside the coastal plain, from the Golan Heights in 
the north to Ofira in the south. This settlement will be both urban and agricul- 
tural, and the settlers on the Golan Heights are the northern and most important 
link in this plan." 

(The speech of the Chief of general staff at the same gathering has been 


^7f^ 'Slffh^n^ U^Sti^ 

^ o5<r-u*ji 







.TI-UUJ* "'J 



Name Date established Affiliation population 

1 Kefar Etzion -- September 1957.... NRP 1,000 

2. Mehola February 1968 NRP 90 

3. Kallia do Labor 120 

4. KiryatArba April 1968 Gush Emunim 1,500 

5 Argaman November 1968 Herut 90 

6. AllonShevut July 1969 NRP (i) 

7. Rosh Tzurim NRP O) 

8 Gilgal January 1970 Labor 240 

9. Massua --do NRP 80 

10. Mevo Horon do Poalei Agudat Israel 120 

11. MitzpeShalem December 1970 Labor 40 

12. Yitav(Na'aran) 30 

13. Patzael . do do 160 

14. Attarot (Hamra) May 1971 Histadrut 90 

15. Bekaot July 1972 80 

16. Ma'ale Ephraim do Labor 100 

17. Gitit August 1972 Herut 100 

16. Menora December 1972 Labor 90 

19 Ma'ale Adumin March 1975 Gush Emunim 130 

20 Ofra May 1975 do 100 

21. Tekoah June 1975 NRP 40 

22 Elazar October 1975 NRP 90 

23. Kochav iiashahar June 1975 Labor 40 

24 Eton Moreh (Qadum) December 1975 Gush Emunim 200 

25. Rol March 1976 40 

26. Mevo Shilo November 1976 Labor 50 

27. Netiv Hagdud 1976 40 

28. Mivsam 1976 —.do 30 

29. Almog .. January 1977 do 30 

30. Rimonim March 1977 30 

31. Pe'erim (Mesha) May 1977 Gush Emunim 60 

32. Shayelet 1977 

33. Nahal Reyhan 1977 

34. Tomer 2 

35. MigdalOzJ 

36. Jiftlik2 I 

38' Horon'lfimmelM '^PProved by the government of Prime Minister Begin. 
39'. Yattir2 .'J 

' Included in figure for Kfar Etzion (No. 1). 
3 Settlements currently under construction. 


Name Location Status 

Givon North of Jerusalem Proposed by Labor Housing Ministry and 

by Gush Emunim. 

Karna'im West of Nablus Gush Emunim. 

Unknovim Near Jericho Do. 

Nabi Saleh Northwiest of Ramallah Do. 

Dothan Near Jenin Do. 

Shomron Near Sebastia Do. 

Beit El Near Ramallah Do. 

Tirza Nablus-Damya Road Do. 

Hans East of Pe'erim Do. 

Shilo North of Ramallah Do. 

20-488 O - TS - 2 




Name Date established Affiliation population 

1. Merom Golan July 1967 Labor 700 

2. Snir ._ September 1967 Mapam 90 

3. Afiq December 1967 Labor 90 

4. Mevo Mamma January 1968 150 

5. Eliad do 150 

6. Ein Zivan do do 350 

7. GivatYoav IVIarch 1968 do 180 

8. Geshur April 1968 Mapam 80 

9. Ramat Magshimim July 1968 NRP 90 

10. Neot Golan September 1968 Independent Liberal 180 

11. Neve Ativ April 1969 do 150 

12. Ramot May 1969 Labor 150 

13. Khisfit - May 1971 NRPp 200 

14. Bne Yehuda September 1971 Labor 420 

15. El Rom July 1971 do 250 

16. Nov July 1972 NRP 150 

17. KefarHaruv May 1973 Labor 180 

18. Gamla (Mordot) 1973 do 50 

19. Keshet May 1974 NRP 300 

20. Har Odem (Sion) December 1975 Independent Liberal 100 

21. Shaal do Herut 50 

22. Tannuriya (Yonathan) do NRP 50 

23. Aniam 

24. Avne Etan 

25. Katzrin 

Settlements currently under construction. 


Name Date established Affiliation Estimated 


1. Ofira 1967 150 

2. Nahal Sinai December 1967 Herut 40 

3. Dikia June 1969 do 80 

4. Kefar Darom October 1970 NRP 40 

5. Sadot January 1971 Labor 260 

6. Dizahav September 1971 Independent Liberal 80 

7. Neviot do Labor 150 

8. Nahal Morag June 1972 do 50 

9. Netrazim November 1972 Herut 50 

10. Netzer Hazani (Katif) May 1973 NRP 50 

11. Yamit 1973 1,000 

12. Netiv Ha'Asara July 1973 Labor 150 

13. Ogda August 1974 do 140 

14. Sufa(Sukkot) do do 30 

15. Nahal Haruvit(Tarsag) December 1975 Herut 40 

16. Hclit.____- .... July 1977 Labor 50 

17. Absalom .- 

18. Nir Avraham i 

19. Talmei Josef i 

I Currently under construction. 

Explanatory Notes 


Precise data concernine: settlements is invariably very difficult to obtain. Plans, 
both long and short-term, are prepared by a variety of organizations and often 
find their way into the public domain with something less than complete accuracy. 
In addition, Israeli political factions with a stake in the establishment of settle- 
ments often use leaks to the press in an effort to force the hand of the govern- 
ment. Such leaks, often dealing prematurely with the approval or establishment 
of a new settlement or with the expansion of an existing one, are easily confused 
with factual reports of decisions taken by the only official body authorized to 
commit the government. That body is the Interministerial Committee on Settle- 
ments, whose chairman since the Begin government assumed office has been re- 
tired Major General Ariel Sharon, Minister of Agriculture. 



The names of settlements often go through several changes between the ap- 
proval of the settlement and its "permanent" construction. This is usually because 
the initial planning organization makes reference only to a geographic location 
or utilizes an Arabic place-name ; the settlers themselves then opt for a different 
name, often based on the site's biblical antecedent. 


There are usually three important dates in the life of a settlement : first, its 
date of official approval ; second, the commencement of the physical preparation 
of a site or the movement of initial settlers into pre-existing buildings ; and third, 
the transfer of the settlement to a different and permanent location, which occurs 
frequently, but not always. The date shown in the preceding tables is the second, 
the date on which resources are actually committed to the enterprise. 


No settlement is completely independent; most are affiliated with a settle- 
ment organization which, in turn, is linked with one or another political party or 
faction. The settlement depends to a large degree on its parent organization for 
infusion of human, financial and material resources. 

The most successful economically of the settlements are those affiliated with 
the three large kibbutz federations belonging to the two old-line factions of the 
Labor Party or to the more left-of-center Mapam Party ; their experience in es- 
tablishing successful agricultural settlements predates the establishment of the 
State of Israel. Although the federations associated with the Labor Party fac- 
tions (Mapai and Ahdut HaAvodah) cooperate fully today and would agree on 
most political matters, their continued separate existence reflects the depth of 
their political differences during the early days of the state. The kibbutz federa- 
tion affiliated with Mapam has for ideological reasons not participated extensively 
in settlements in the occupied territories, limiting itself to two kibbutzim in the 

The two major elements in the current government coalition — the Herut Party 
and the National Religious Party (NRP) — are relative newcomers to the settle- 
ment field. These two parties have become, nevertheless, the primary exponents of 
the policy of unrestricted Jewish settlement in the occupied territories, particu- 
larly the West Bank. The only group showing more zeal for settlement is the 
orthodox religious, ultra-nationalistic Gush Emunim, which maintains links with 
the activist Youth Wing of tho NRP. 

A number of settlements, known as nahals, have been established primarily for 
security purposes, with economic self-sufficiency being a minor consideration. 
These are under the direct supervision of the Israeli Defense Forces and are 
populated by young volunteers, both male and female, who are given training in 
both small-unit military tactics and agriculture. When such settlements exhibit 
the ability to subsist economically by themselves, and when a sufficient number 
of civilian settlers are available, they are transferred to one or another settle- 
ment organization. 


Precise population figures are impossible to obtain. The figures in the tables 
have been derived by counting the individual housing units in each settlement and 
multiplying by an appropriate factor, depending primarily on the age and eco- 
nomic vitality of each settlement. These figures are therefore more accurately a 
gauge of the potential population of each settlement, since it is difficult to esti- 
mate at any given time the number of housing units unoccupied. 


Israeli Settlements on the West Bank 

Map B 

Israeli settlement 

• ^ 

Government proposed 
seitlemeni area 


Gush Emunim proposed 
settlement area 

Undei cor>struc1ion 

S lOM.I.* 

S 10 K<lo"i»(e(» 





* »Janin ' 





t^oalqijjrah q 

\ Pe eriin 


/"■'not IHupiiiiL 



Natiil Mg^"si>\ 

_ 7 Ram ^ 

Severs! settlements » Q ' Allah* 
proposed for. \irorvnS-'i'mr:' ,. 



ffoi/! TjM^iin^Jh^ir 

erusaVm Severot dettiements 


. Israel 

•^j; _ GAZA STRIP ' 


A^n Shevut c\ ... *„ , , 

<C/„, w,.,,,. AAMigda/ 0/ ii/c I 

/ tMinpe Shslom t. 


[^Kiryat Arba 



Yalttr (/ i. 










573826 B 77 


Israeli Settlements on the Golan Heights 

Map A 

Israeli seltlsment 

Government propORwi 
settlement area 

Uridof construction 

— Armistice Line (July 20. 1049) 

UNOOF United Nations Oioengugemenl 
Otjserver Force 
Lirw A Israeli DIsengsgemenI Lme 

Line A-1 Israeli Civilians 

Line 9 Syrian Disengagement Line 

573826 8-77 


Isr aeli Settlements in the Gaza Strip and Sinai 


Cay pt 



\ Israel 


(tsracf --Occupied^ 









T rO JOrf^MIMa fifOfVMtf for (A# 


Senator Abourezk. The list is for all the occupied territories not 
only the West Bank. 

So it is your view that the Government es:tablishes the location of 
the settlement and in fact decides whether or not the settlement should 
be established ; is that correct? 

Dr. Shahak. Yes. That is definitely so. I think that this can be taken 
as a fact. 

Senator Abourezk. Do you have an opinion as to why the Israeli 
Government is establishing settlements in what are clearly occupied 
territories ? 

Dr. Shahak. Well, I think that by now with this Government there 
cannot be the slightest reason to doubt the intention. One of the 
articles from the Jerusalem Post, which I can also submit in evidence, 
is actually called "A Vision of Israel at Century's End." This article 
describes the settlements. 

I think the intention of this Government is, insofar as the West 
Bank and Gaza and Golan and part of Sinai is concerned, is to keep 
all of those territories as a permanent colony of the State of Israel — 
not part of the state but as a colony because people there would not 
be given rights. I think that the settlements are established in order 
to achieve a colonial rule which will be easy to keep. We will keep the 
people there in a state of perpetual submission. 

It is for this reason that in the article which I have submitted with 
the map it is stated that one of the reasons for establishing the new 
settlements in special places is to prevent Arab continuity. If there 
is a block, as it said in one of the articles, of Arabs of 100,000 people 
and nearby another block of another similar number of people, then 
a line of settlements will be established between them to prevent the 
co2itinuity of the people. 

I think that very many colonial regimes behave like this only they 
usually had fortresses instead of settlements. The settlements by now, 
and under this Government, only make sense if you assume that this 
is to hold the land around them in perpetuity. 

Senator Abourezk. So, you believe that the Government of Israel 
wants to hold the West Bank in perpetuity ? 

Dr. Shahak. And the Gaza Strip and the settled part of Sinai and 

Senator Abourezk. Is it your opinion that the Israeli Government 
has no intention of negotiating the return of those territories? 

Dr. Shahak, I am absolutely sure about the West Bank and the 
Gaza. There are many statements to this effect. As for Golan, I am 
willing to submit a statement of General Sharon speaking in the name 
of Prime Minister Begin on September 9. It makes a very strong 
statement on September 9 of this year. I can also say that on general 
evidence, that this unwillingness to return territories with settlements 
includes the Israeli Labor Party and the other major parties of Israel 
who consider that the settlements once founded will remain a part 
of the State of Israel. This is the opinion of the three major parties 
of Israel — Likud, the Democratic Party for Change, and the Labor 

Senator Abourezk. You believe they are all in agreement on that 
policy ? 


Dr. Shaiiak. On that policy, yes. They are not in agreement about 
plans for further settlements but they are agreed that settlements 
once founded will remain as part of the area of the State of Israel. 
Insofar as the Labor Party is concerned, their past minister in charge 
of settlements, Mr. Galizi, has expressed himself with great clarity on 
the subject. 

Senator Abourezk. Dr. Shahak, I wonder if you know or if you 
would be able to give the committee an idea of the rights which are 
provided and denied the Palestinian Arabs who live on the West Bank 
under that occupation. 

Dr. Shahak. Yes. I will do it with greatest pleasure because I have 
dealt with this subject for a very long time. 

The first thing that I want to emphasize is the complete absence 
of basic democratic rights, the rights that are called in this country 
"grassroot democratic rights." I'm not speaking about national rights. 
I am speaking about the rights of having a public meeting, a right of 
establishing cultural clubs, let's say, for studying poetry or for study- 
ing any part of any culture. 

I am speaking here about the right of peaceful and nonviolent 
demonstrations, the right of having a Palestinian flag in one's posses- 
sion, the rights to form paid unions 

Senator Abourezk. A Palestinian flag ? 

Dr. Shahak. To have a Palestinian flag in one's possession is a crime 
and not only this, it is also a crime to put colors of Palestinian flags 
on one's tee shirt even if one is only a boy. Children have been very 
cruelly punished and required to post a bond for good behavior for 
putting the colors of Palestinian flags on their tee shirts. I have 
testified about this many times. 

Included in this is the right of peaceful and nonviolent demon- 
stration. I will quote the right of closing shops as a protest or as a 
sign of mourning. I believe there cannot be any more peaceful dem- 
onstration than closing shops. This is forbidden and the shopkeepers 
are very cruelly punished for this "crime." They can be also arbi- 
trarily punished in addition. 

To this I want to add what is included in any state — and by the 
way also in the State of Israel on behalf of its citizens — the right of 
not being deported. 

Any inhabitant of conquered territory including those in Jerusalem 
can be deported, can be taken from his home at night and without 
any legal procedure whatsoever can be put across the border. I do 
believe, and as a matter of fact I can quote a supreme judge of the 
Israeli court, Mr. Haim Cohen, who said but was helpless when saying 
it that exile is the most horrible punishment because that was the 
punishment inflicted upon Cain. 

Nevertheless, the military government has the right to inflict this 
punishment arbitrarily and the men deported will never be allowed to 
come back. 

I would like to give you one single example of a man who was my 
personal friend for several years in Jerusalem. Mr. Ali Khatib who 
was the editor of the Arab paper, Ashab. In early 1975 I heard about 
his deportation in the following manner: After opening my radio in 
the morning to hear the news, I hear that Ali Khatib was' deported. 


He left behind him a wife and seven children. I do offered this fact 
for the benefit of those who are fighting in this country and rightly 
so, for the right of the unification of families. The family of Ali 
Khatib lives in Jerusalem and it can be reunified only out of its own 
homeland. I especially use this expression. It cannot be reunified in its 
own homeland even if you take only the town of Jerusalem as the 
homeland of the family of Ali Khatib because no one of those who has 
been deported, and without any legal procedure whatsoever, is ever 
allowed to come back. 

I have demanded many times and before many forums that people 
deported from conquered territories should be allowed to come back 
and to be reunified with their families. I have talked in vain. 

The last thing I want to mention is a question of administrative 
imprisonment. You have imprisonment inflicted now on two of the 
perhaps, in my opinion, greatest leaders of Palestinians of the West 
Bank, Dr. Tayssir Aruri, teacher of physics in Birzeit College, and 
Mr. Atallah Rashmawi, who endured 41 months of the administrative 
imprisonment and the second was elected to the municipality of Beit 
Sahur. I want to refer to the last fact because of its significance. Many 
mayors of the West Bank have been deported while in office and can- 
didates have been deported or imprisoned without trial. I should say 
that every human being in the conquered territories knows that he can 
be imprisoned without trial, that he can be deported, that he can be 
arbitrarily punished and this is the greatest violation of human rights. 
It places all those people — more than a million people — in a state which 
I am not ashamed to call "servitude," or "slavery." They have no guar- 
antee whatsoever for any sort of personal security. 

If a man can live in the city and be the next day forever expelled, 
this is slavery or servitude. This is what is described in the literature 
about slavery in America and about black slaves being sold "down the 
river," to use an expression from Uncle Tom's Cabin. 

Senator Abourezk. Are you familiar. Dr. Shahak, with the supply 
of water in the West Bank in any way or form ? Is it your view that 
there is adequate water or a shortage of water? 

Dr. Shahak. I am aware of certain areas about which I can testify — 
the town and neighborhood of Eamallah and the Jordan Valley. How- 
ever, apart from those two areas I did not make any particular re- 
search. About those two areas I am willing to testify. 

Senator Abourezk. Generally, do you know if the settlements being 
established are hooking into the water table or water supply systems? 
Does this create a shortage of water for the existing residents of the 
West Bank? 

Dr. Shahak. In the Jordan Valley, definitely so. 

In the other areas I did not see great signs of it. Also in other areas 
the settlements are not agricultural to any great extent. I did not see 
them taking very much water. 

In the Jordan area, definitely so. 

However, I would like to say something about Ramallah. I know the 
situation very well there. The same thing, in my opinion, happens in 
other cities. 

As a means of pressuring towns like Romallah to join themselves 
into water systems of the State of Israel, permits for water pumps or 


extra water pumps are either not being given or being delayed by the 
military governor. 

I should explain that everything in the cononered territories needs 
a permit. A city cannot buy a water pump without having the per- 
mission from the military governor. T should say that a municipality 
cannot hire additional janitors without this permission. 

It is my definite impression that the towns which are being pres- 
sured to be joined to the water system or to the electricity system of 
Israel are not given permits for water pumps or machines for elec- 
tricity or for spare parts for those machines or pumps in order to 
compel them to join the electricity and water system in Israel. 

I also can add to this what happened in the town of Hebron which 
was compelled, more or less, by the system to join the electricity and 
water system of Israel. The main connections of electricity and water 
to Hebron are now situated in the settlement Kiryat Arba so that 
anybody who sits in Kiryat Arba can at the moment close the elec- 
tricity and water of Hebron. I believe this is the aim of the pressure. 

Senator Abotjrezk. Do you believe that part of this pressure is 
desiefned by the Israeli Government to discourage the Palestinian 
Arabs from staying in the West Bank so that they will leave ; would 
that be their objective ? 

Dr. Shahak. If you speak about the intellectual and the middle 
class, yes. If you speak about ordinary workers, no, because by now 
there is a great number of Palestinian workers in territories working 
inside Israel. According to an interview of the commander of the Tel 
Aviv policy, Mr. Tiomkin, given on September 9 of this year in 
Ha'aretz newspaper — in Tel Aviv alone there are 70,000 workers from 
the territories. This means that in all nren of Israel, in my opinion, 
there would be something like up to 200,000. Therefore, while intel- 
lectuals are pressured directly or indirectly to leave — directly by being 
imprisoned or deported, and indirectly by the economy being impov- 
erished and not having any jobs for them to live — I think that by now 
the State of Israel is quite interested that the ordinary people will 
remain and will work in the Israeli economy. 

Senator Abourezk. But Israel doesn't want Palestinian political 
leaders remaining on the West Bank ; is that correct ? 

Dr. Shahak. Yos. Anv political loaders of independence. I should 
say that by now the State of Israel is creating something which can 
be described as a class of quislings. 

I will give one exam7:>le. We have Abd El-Nur Ganmo. This man 
assassinated anotlier man in the town of Ramallah. His case was then 
taken from the civil court into military court. The military court found 
him acting in self-defense. This is a man who got enormously rich 
because he was given monopoly of cooking gas from Israeli souives to 
inhabitants of tlie district of Ramallah. 

Other examples can be given in other territories. I believe that 
especially now the Israeli Government is creating a class of quislings 
which should not l^e confused by any means with the previous notables 
of King Hussein. These last, are newly made men. In many cases they 
are criminals, as T have said, and it is the aim, like in many other 
atrocious colonial regimes, to make of those people leaders. If you 
want exa/mples Angola and Mozambique would be good examples. I 


think that you know that in Soweto there is a strong attempt to take 
criminal elements and to make them leaders of Soweto. 

The siame attemipt is being made in the West Bank and in the Gaza 
Strip now. 

Senator Abourezk. You spoke briefly about the child labor viola- 
tions that you thought were occurring in the West Bank. I wonder if 
you would elaborate a little bit on that ? 

Dr. Shahak. Not in the West Bank. The main area of child labor 
exploitation is in the Eg^'ptian territory in Sinai, north wesiteni Sinai 
around the town of Yamit, one of the settlements. 

The second area of exploitation of child labor from conquered ter- 
ritories is, as a matter of fact, in the State of Israel itself, in Israeli 
villages in the south area of Israel between Bei-sheba and Rehorot, 
especially in the area called the Lachish area. Very many cases were 
quot-ed in the Israeli press. Many cases Avere recorded by me. 

In this area you have first of all child labor and, second, j^ou have 
feudal subjection of whole families who are living usually under a 
tree or in a cabin. AAHien I say in a cabin I'm not quoting "Uncle Tom's 
Cabin" in vain because I have seen those cabins and the pictures are 
like the pictures of this book. They are in a state of such feudal sub- 
jection to the particular fai-mer that it happened very often that when 
a boy escapes, let's say from such slavery, then the farmer or the son of 
the farmer — and there was one example in which a fanner's son pur- 
sued an escaping bov and found him working for another fanner and 
beat them to death. I can give this to you from the Israeli press. I also 
investigated it myself. 

The servitude of the children usually coming from the Gaza Strip 
in northern Sinai and in this area and similar areas north of Israel is 
one of the really horrid phenomena which I can say is a crime, crying 
to God for vengeance. So I must say to you that I am really afraid 
about my own people and those who help them in oppressing others 
for those 10 years and helping in this child exploitation. 

Senator Aboitrezk. I have one final question for you. 

You have said that there is deportation without trial or hearing 
and that there is imprisonment without trial or hearing. Are the resi- 
dents of the occupied territories, the Palestinian Arabs, accorded any 
of the standard rights, legal rights, or human rights that Israeli 
citizens or people of the United States are accorded ? 

Dr. Shahak. I think not. Israeli citizens cannot be deported. By 
custom and not by law Israeli citizens for 5 full years are not impris- 
oned without trial and although the law exists but it is now never 

And I would say that the most important fact is in which they are 
not accorded basic rights is that they cannot exercise any form of 
basic democratic protest by fonnation of parties, associations, trade 
union, cultural clubs, and so on. This, in my opinion, after 10 years 
constitutes the most important grievance. 

Permit me also to conclude by saying that if General MacArthur 
after conquering Japan in 1945 would have denied to Japanese people 
for more than 10 years such rights instead of allowing establishment 
of democracy rather rapidly step by step, you would not have now 
a Japanese State which is as friendly to the United States as it is now. 


You would have something very much worse, worse both for the 
Japanese people and for the United States. It is this very fact that T 
can invoke the regime of INfacArthur as the example of democracy 
which should be followed at least for some the first steps and after 
10 yeai-s which shows the situation of the people there.. 

Senator Abourezk. Dr. Shahak, T want to express my personal 
thanks to you and that of my committee for what T consider to be 
a very courageous act. I happen to know how it feels to speak from 
a minority point of view. As I understand it. tliat is the position which 
you hold — one of a minority in Israel. I think you have served the 
cause of human rights and the cause of justice very well in what you 
have done and what you continue to do. I hope you will be able to 
continue to speak out. 

On behalf of the committee I want to thank vou very much for 
your tremendous contribution which you have made in your testimony 
here today. 

Dr. Shahak. Thank you. 

Senator Abottrezk. Our next Avitness is Mr. Yehuda Zvi Blum, 
professor of international law at Hebrew I^niversity. 

I should make clear at this time that the committee notified the 
Embassy of Israel to ask if it wanted to be represented at these hear- 
ings. The Embassy sugsrested Dr. Blum's testimony but tlieir position 
is that he is not officially representing the Israeli Government. 

Maybe you can explain who you are representing and please give 
your background as well. 


Mr. Blum. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am indeed grate- 
ful to you for this point of clarification. I happen to be on university 
business in this country at this point of time. It has been suorgested to 
me by our embassv that since the judicial status of the settlements in 
Judea and Samaria has come up before this distinguished committee 
and since this is a question I have examined in some detail in the past 
years, I might wish to testify before this committee. 

May I start by expressing to you, Mr. Chairman, my appreciation for 
having given me this opportunity to present to you my views on this 
matter, to which, as I have said, I have given considerable attention 
over the past 10 years or so. 

Since you have asked me also to give you ]:)riefly my credentials may 
I say that I am a professor of international law at the Hebrew Univer- 
sity of Jerusalem and also director of the Hariw Sacher Institute for 
Legislative Research and Comparative Law at the Hebrew I'^niversity. 

I do not like to trade on my own background, but since this seems to 
be the ]")roper practice here, as I have gathered from your ouestion to 
the previous speaker, may I just briefly say that I was born in Czecho- 
slovakia. I was detained by the Gei-mans in the Bergen-Belsen con- 
centration camp in 1044. Subsequently I was a refugee in Switzerland 
in 1945 and came to Palestine as it then was in tlie same year of 1945. 1 
have been a resident and citizen of Israel ever since its inception. 


I have resided pemianently in Israel since 1948 and except for a 
number of trips abroad for study and teaching purposes. 

Senator Abourezk. Mr. Bhim, it is my understanding that you were 
in the same prison camp at the same time in Germany that Dr. Shahak 
was ; is that right ? 

Mr. Blum. This is correct. I did not know Di\ Shahak at the time 
because he belonged to what was called the Polish camp and I was in 
the Hungarian camp. "We may have been 100 yards apart from one 
another without knowing each other at the time. I met Dr. Shahak 
subsequently in 1945 in Palestine. I have known him ever since. 

May I devote this opening statement of mine to the question of the 
legality of Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria as well as to the 
broader problem underlying this question — that is the status of Judea 
and Samaria under international law. 

Mr. Chairman, I have had the benefit of reading the transcript 
of a statement made here at an earlier meeting by Mrs. Rita Hauser. I 
would like to associate myself with that passage of her statement in 
which ISIrs. Hauser interpreted article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Red 
Cross Convention of 1949, assuming of course that the convention in 
question is indeed applicable to the problem here under consideration. 

Let me briefly point out mv point of vieAv on this matter. The Red 
Cross Conference at which the Fourth Geneva Convention was adopted 
was convened only 4 years after the end of World War II when the 
events of that war w^ere still fresh in the memory of the conference 
participants. Everyone at that time remembered the policies of Nazi 
Germany which strove methodically for the mass expulsion of popula- 
tion groups from their lands (as in Poland) and for the settlement 
of Germans in those areas in place of the original inliabitants. 

Even the official Red Cross interpretation of article 49 clearly states 
that the purpose of the provision here under discussion, that is article 
49, was to insure that such phenomenon of so-called colonization 
should not occur. 

It is quite clear in my view that these circumstances have no bearing 
upon the establishment of Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria 
if only for the simple reason that the establishment of these settle- 
ments does not entail the expulsion of the local population from its 
land and from its places of residence. 

May I, therefore, briefly remind this committee of Mrs. Hauser's 
conclusions, with which I happen to concur, and which seem to be a 
correct description of the position of contemporary international law 
on this matter. 

This is what Mrs. Hauser said : "An overall reading of article 49 as 
well as of the official ICRC commentary to it, make clear the reference 
to the type of deportations practiced by the Nazis in AVorld War II. 
These were in the nature of mass transfers of people for forced labor 
or death camps. It can be argued that this article is intended only to 
preclude the transfer of the occupied population into the territory 
from which it has displaced the local population. The movement of 
the occupied population into unpopulated areas involving no local 
displacement is not then a violation of article 49. 

"I believe that this is a reasonable interpretation of article 49." The 
Oppenheim-Lauterpacht Treaties which is one of the leading treaties 
in contemporary international law, supports this view. 


She then quoted from the Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, volume II, 
seventh edition, page 452: 

The occupying power must not deport or transfer part of its own civilian 
population into the territory occupied by him, a prohibition intended to cover 
cases of the occupant bringing in its nationals for the purpose of displacing the 
population of occupied territories. 

I would reemphasize this : "for the purpose of displacing the popu- 
lation of the occupied territories." 

So, I believe that even on the assumption that for some reason the 
Fourth Geneva Red Cross Convention were applicable to Israel's 
rights in Judea and Samaria, the establishment of Israeli settlements 
there would still not be in violation of the said article. 

However, beyond this specific remark which refers to the correct 
interpretation of article 49, I believe a broader question is raised here 
which warrants further examination. 

In my opinion, Israel cannot be regarded as an "occupying power" 
in Judea and Samaria, nor can those areas be viewed as occupied terri- 
tory held by the State of Israel, not only as regards article 49 but in 
all matters relating to the Fourth Geneva Convention in general and 
even in all applications of international law of belligerent occupation 
in the broader sense. 

The terms "occupying power" and "occupied territory" are technical 
terms with a very well-defined meaning in international law. 

They refer to a situation in which, as the result of hostilities between 
two states, one of them seizes control of the territory which is under 
the sovereignty of the other. Such areas thus become occupied terri- 
tories, and the state which controls them assumes the status of an 
occupying power together with all the rights and obligations which 
flow from this status. 

However, actual sovereignty over such areas is not transferred by 
one state to another as the result of the change of physical control over 
them. Tlie legitimate sovereign, as is the legal and technical term on 
tliis matter; that is, the state whose forces have been driven out of the 
occupied territory, retains its sovereignty over this territory even after 
its physical removal from it and the annexation of such territory by the 
occupant is absolutely prohibited. 

The purpose of these rules of international law of belligerent occu- 
pation is to protect the rights of the sovereign from the occupant. 
Article 49 must also be understood as one of the rules intended to 
achieve this goal. 

And yet, in all matters relating to Judea and Samaria, and the same 
argument applies also to the Gaza Strip, the circumstances envisioned 
by the Fourth Geneva Red Cross Convention do not exist because the 
situation here is not one in which a legitimate sovereign and an occupy- 
ing power are confronting one another. 

In order to understand this particular situation, we have of course 
to recall that during the mandate period, the period of the British 
mandate over Palestine, which ended in 1948, Judea, Samaria, and the 
Gaza Strip formed an integral part of the Palestine mandate. In the 
well-known resolution 181- (II) of November 29, 1947, the ILN. Gen- 
eral Assembly recommended that the British mandate be terminated 
and that Palestine be partitioned into a Jewish State, an Arab State, 


and the city of Jerusalem as a corpus separatum, the three regions to 
be linked by an economic and monetary union. 

The Jewish agency, which represented the Jewish side in the delib- 
erations concerning the future of Palestine, expressed at that time its 
readiness to accept the partition resolution as a compromise between 
conflicting national aspirations of Jews and Arabs. 

This readiness on the Jewish part was forthcoming despite the fact 
that it would have involved a second and very considerable reduction 
in the size of the territory earmarked for Jewish rule as compared with 
the original Jewish national home of the Palestine mandate. 

The original Palestine mandate, may I add here, comprised both 
Palestine and Trans Jordan, but under article 25 of the Palestine man- 
date Great Britain was empowered to postpone or withhold applica- 
tion of such provisions of the mandate as she might consider inappli- 
cable to the existing local conditions in the territories lying between 
the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine that is Transjordan. 

Pursuant to this provision. Great Britain in 1921 decided, with the 
consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to exclude the ter- 
ritory of the Palestine mandate lying to the east of the Jordan Eiver, 
which is Transjordan, from the application of the mandate provi- 
sions relative to the establishment of the Jewish national home. 

As a result of that British decision, the territory earmarked for the 
Jewish national home was reduced to about one-fourth of its original 
size and that is western Palestine. Only slightly more than half of this 
remaining one- fourth which is about one-eighth of the original Pal- 
estine mandate would have become the Jewish state under the parti- 
tion plan of the U.N. General Assembly. 

No less painful for the Jewish side in 1947 was the fact that Jeru- 
salem with its considerable Jewish majority — and Jerusalem has had 
an uninterrupted Jewish majority for at least the last 130 years — and 
with the unique place the Holy City has occupied in the hearts and 
minds of Jews for three millennia was to be excluded from the ter- 
ritory of the projected Jewish state and was to become an interna- 
tionalized territory. It was to become an enclave within the contem- 
plated Arab State. 

However, all these concessions of the Jewish side were made con- 
ditional on the reciprocal acceptance of the partition package deal by 
the Arabs. No such acceptance on the Arab side was forthcoming. The 
Arabs of Palestine as well as the neighboring Arab States categorically 
rejected the partition plan and were not prepared to settle for anything 
less than an independent state of Palestine to be ruled in its entirety 
by the Arabs. 

Thus, at a meeting of premiers and foreign ministers of Arab Lea- 
gue States held in Cairo between December 8 and 17, 1947, following 
the adoption by the General Assembly of the partition recommenda- 
tion, it was decided that the Arabs were "determined to enter battle 
against the United Nations decision to partition Palestine and by the 
will of God to carry it to a successful conclusion." 

At the same meeting it was also agreed to take "decisive measures'* 
to prevent the partition of Palestine and the General Assembly's res- 
olution on this matter was defined as "a violation of the principles 
of right and justice." 


Arab opposition to the United Nations' partition plan was not con- 
fined to statements and declarations. It was manifested in acts of 
violence that began on November 30, 1947, some 12 hours after the 
adoption by the General Assembly of the partition recommendation. 
These acts of violence sponsored by the Higher Arab Committee which 
was recognized by Great Britain as the representative body of the 
Palestinian Arabs and which incidentally was headed at the time by 
Haj Amin-Husseini who spent the war years in Germany and was 
instrumental in promoting the mass extermination policies of the Ger- 
mans against the Jews — soon assumed with the aid and abetment of 
the neighboring Arab States such proportions that it threw Palestine 
into a state of virtual chaos and anarchy. 

In its first special report to the Security Council, dated February 
16, 1948, the United Nations Commission on Palestine, set up under 
the partition resolution, informed the Council that : 

Powerful Arab interests both inside and outside Palestine are defying the 
resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter 
by force the settlement envisaged therein. (U.N. Document S/676). 

Some 7 we^ks later in a report dated April 10, 1948, to the second 
special session of tlie U.N. General Assembly convened to discuss the 
developments in Palestine, the commission already advised the Gen- 
eral Assembly tliat the implementation of the partition resolution as a 
whole, including the establishment of the international special regime 
for Jerusalem, had been thwarted by Arab violence. In this report the 
connnission pointed out : 

opposition to the resolution of November 25, 1947, has stated in the form of armed 
resistance. It is not only the Arab States envisaged in the resolution which cannot 
now be constituted according to the partition plan, but the establishment of the 
Jewish state and of the international regime for the city of Jerusalem are also 
obstructed by Arab resistance. 

Arab opposition to the plan of the Assembly as stated in the formal organized 
efforts by strong Arab elements both inside and outside Palestine to prevent its 
implementation and to thwart its objectives by threats and acts of violence in- 
cluding repeated armed incursions into Palestinian territory. 

The judicial aspects of the Arab refusal to accept the partition plan 
are very ably summed up by Professor Aleli Hulatapa of Cambridge 
University in England. He says — 

It is unfortunate that the Arabs rejected the resolution. They were to some 
extent correct in their incidental assertion tliat the General Assembly was not 
able of resolution to dispose in a binding manner of the whole or any part of 
the territory of Palestine. Palestine was not the property of the U.N. to give or 
withhold as it pleased. The role of the U.N. was a restricted one. Its acquiescence 
in the termination of Britain of its obligations as mandatory * * * was a legal 
necessity. Moreover, the Assembly could, by putting forward a plan which the 
interested parties might accept, provide the legal basis for the settlement of the 
future government of tlie country. But resolutions of the General As.sembly do 
not normally create legal obligations for tlie members of the U.N. (even if Israel 
and the proposed Arab state had been members at that time, which thev were 
not) ; and the partition resolution did not have a legislative character. The As- 
sembly could not l)y its resolution give the Jews and the Arabs in Palestine any 
rights which eitlier did not otherwise pos.sess ; nor correspondingly could it take 
away such rights as they did possess. (Lauterpacht, "Jerusalem and the Holv 
Places," 1968, lb. ) 

Consequently, when the Palestine mandate was terminated on May 
14, 1948, the partition resolution had already been overtaken by events 



and had been effectively frustrated through Arab opposition, as has 
been pointed out by Lauterpacht in three out of its four major ele- 
ments. No Arab State was established within Palestine. There thus 
could be no economic union of the Arab and Jewish States. Further, 
the physical attack by the Arab forces upon the Jewish State as such 
left the Israeli forces with no option but to respond in kind and main- 
tain such hold as they could upon the areas then in Jewish possession 
to the point by way of defensive rationalization of their position of 
moving in places beyond the lines laid down in the partition resolution. 
Since the resolution failed to be implemented, its description of 
specific boundaries ceased to be relevant. As a description of a par- 
ticular boundary, they became worthless. Thus — 

The coming into existence of Israel does not depend legally upon the partition 
resolution of November 1947. The right of a state to exist flows from its factual 
existence, especially when that existence is prolonged, shows every sign of con- 
tinuance, and is recognized by the generality of nations. (Ibid. 19.) 

In fact, Mr. Chairman, in those days, that is in 1948, there was little 
doubt indeed in the minds of jurists and statesmen 'alike as to the 
apportiomnent of blame for all these events and as to the pix>per legal 
evaluation of the acts undertaken by the Arabs of Palestine and of 
the neighboring Arab Sta,tes upon the termination of the Palestine 

The non-Arab world was virtually unanimous in its condemnation 
of the very presence of the military forces of the Arab States on 
Palestinian soil since the forcible entry of those armies into Palestine 
and the resulting military intervention was regarded as a use of force 
in violation of the rule embodied in article II, paragraph 4 of the 
United Nations' Charter. 

The use of force by the contiguous Arab States having been illegal, 
it naturally could not give rise to any valid legal title. As we jurists 
say, "Ex injuria jus non oritur." (There cannot flow rights from a 
wrongful act.) 

The initial justification given by the Arab States for their armed 
intervention at the time was that they had to enter Palestine — 

to establish security and order in place of chaos and disorder which prevailed 
in the face of brutal crimes against humanity in a contiguous country . . . They 
deemed it their bounden duty to intervene in Palestine with the object of putting 
an end to the massacres raging there and upholding law and principles recog- 
nized among the United Nations. 

I quote here f ix>m an Egyptian communication to the Security Coun- 
cil dated May 15, 1948. (U.N. Document S/743.) 

They also asserted, and here I am quoting from a Jordanian cable- 
gram to the Security Council, "that they were compelled to enter 
Palestine to protect unarmed Arabs against massacres." King Ab- 
dullah of Transjordan spoke of his awareness and "our national 
duty toward Palestine in general and Jerusalem in particular." (U.N. 
Document S/748.) 

It was the Ukrainian representative in the Security Council who 
countered these attempts to justfy the illegal Arab intervention in 
Palestine by rightly rejecting the assertion that — 

The intervention has no other object in view than the restoration of .security 
and order in Palestine because it is known that according to the rules of the 
international community each government has the right to restore order only 
in its own territory. (Security Council, OflBcial Records 292nd meeting, p. 25.) 

20-488 O - 78 


He further stated that — 

None of the states whose troops had entered Palestine can claim that Palestine 
forms part of its territory. It is an altogether separate entity without any 
relationship to the terroritories of the States which have sent their troops into 
Palestine. (Ibid, 297th Meeting, p. 5.) 

On May 27, 1948, that is 12 days after the termination of the 
mandate, the Ukranian representative invited the Council to note — 

The unlawful invasion by a number of states of the territory of Palestine 
which does not form part of the territory of any of the states whose armed 
forces have invaded it. (Ibid, 30th meeting, p. 7.) 

Wlien the Arabs became aware of the inherent legal weakness of their 
initial argument of self-defense and restoration of law and order 
in Palestine, they sought to shift it and to justify their armed inter- 
vention by reference to the provisions of chapter 8 of the United 
Nations' Chapter concerning the regional arrangements. Under this 
modified version of their argument, the Arab States maintained that 
Palestine, being a member of the Arab League, and the Arab League 
constituting a regional arrangement, article 52 of the charter applied 
and that the neighboring governments which are members of the 
Arab League consider themselves responsible for the maintenance of 
security in their area as a regional organization in conformity with 
the provisions of the United Nations' Charter. 

This reliance by the Arab States on chapter 8 of the U.N. Charter 
to justify their armed intervention in Palestine was shown by the 
U.S. representative to be devoid of any legal merit. Senator Warren 
Austin, the permanent representative of the United States to the 
United Nations at the time stated before the Securiy Council that — 

The Arab statements are the best evidence we have of the international 
character of their aggression. They tell us quite frankly that their business 
is political. Of course, the statement that they are there to make peace is 
rather remarkable in view of the fact that they are waging war. (Ibid, 302nd 
meeting, pp. 41-2. ) 

Referring specifically to the reply sent by King Abdullah of Trans- 
jordan to questions addressed to him by the Security Council — and 
I emphasize this point because it was King Abdullah of Transjordan 
who overran Judea and Samaria in 1948 — Senator Austin stated 
that the king's answer — 

is characterized by a certain contumacy toward the United Nations and the 
Security Council. He has sent us an answer to our questions addressed to him 
as a ruler who is occupying land outside his domain by the Security Council, 
a body which is recognized in the world to ask these questions of him. The 
contumacy of that reply to the Security Council is the very best evidence of 
the illegal purpose of his government in invading Palestine with armed forces 
and conducting the war which it is waging there. It is against the peace. It is 
not on behalf of peace. It is an invasion with a definite purpose. Therefore, 
here we have the highest type of international violation of the law. The admis- 
sion by those who are committing this violation. (Ibid.) 

The U.S. representative also reminded the Arab States that their 
intervention in Palestine could not be characterized as an action taken 
under chapter 8 of the U.N. Charter, for article 53 of the U.N. 
Charter requires the prior autliorization of the Security Council for 
any enforcement action taken vuider regional arrangements or by a re- 
gional agency and no such authorization had been given to the armed 
intervention into Palestine by the Security Council. 


The concerted Arab attempt to crush Israel by unlawfully invading 
Palestinian soil eventually failed, although some Palestinian ter- 
ritory, that is Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip, remained in the 
hands of the invading Arab armies. 

The military realities prevailing at the time were reflected in the 
armistice agreements concluded between February and July 1949 be- 
tween Israel and each of her Arab neighbors. However, those agree- 
ments did not remove and were not intended to remove the illegality 
of the presence of the invading Arab armies on the territory of the 
former Palestine mandate. 

For present purposes, we do not have to enter into the controversial 
questions relating to the nature and scope of armistice agreements in 
general. It is sufficient to confine ourselves here to a specific provision 
contained in the Israel-Jordan general armistice agreement concern- 
ing the matter here under consideration. I am referring to article II, 
paragraph 2, of the agreement which stipulates that — 

No provision of tliis agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims, 
and positions of either party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Pal- 
estine question, the provisions of this agreement being dictated exclusively by 
military considerations. (UNTS, Vol. 42, p. 306.) 

It therefore follows that the effect of the Israeli-Jordan armistice 
agreement (and similar provisions may also be fomid in the other ar- 
mistice agreements concluded between Israel and the neighboring 
Arab States) was to freeze, as it were, the rights and claims of the par- 
ties as they existed on the day of the agreement's conclusion. In conse- 
quence, no subsequent unilateral act could, as long as the agreement 
remained in force, improve, affect, or alter the rights of any party 
as they existed when the agreement was concluded. 

The purported annexation by the Kingdom of Jordan of Judea and 
Samaria in April of 1950 was therefore from the point of view of in- 
ternational law devoid of any legal effect. I might add parenthetically 
that Egypt never claimed to have annexed the Gaza Strip. 

This conclusion is warranted not only by the above quoted provision 
of the Israel-Jordan general armistice agreement, but also by legal 
considerations of a more general nature. 

For the reasons elaborated by me so far, the most favorable con- 
struction from the Jordanian viewpoint that can be placed on the pres- 
ence of armed elements of Trans Jordan on Palestinian soil after 
May 15, 1948, is that they enjoyed the rights of a belligerent occupant 
within the meaning of this term under international law. 

According to Prof. Julius Stone, one of the most eminent interna- 
tional !aw authorities of our time, the position of the State of Jordan 
on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem insofar as it had a legal 
basis in May 1967, rested on the fact that the State or Transjordan had 
overrun this territory during the 1948 hostilities against Israel. It was 
a belligerent occupant there. (Stone, The Middle East Under Cease- 
Fire,1967,p. 12.) 

It is a cardinal rule of the international law of belligerent occupa- 
tion, as phrased by another eminent international lawyer of our time, 
the late Lord McNair of Cambridge University and a former judge of 
the International Court of Justice, that — .> 

Occupation does not displace or transfer sovereignty. The occupant is entitled 
to exercise military authority over the territory occupied but he does not ac- 


quire sovereignty unless and until it is ceded to him by a treaty of peace. (Mc- 
Nair, The Legal Effect of War, 3rd Ed., 19^8, p. 320.) 

The Finnish international lawyer Castren has written one of the 
better known treatises on belligerent occupation. He points out on 
this matter that — 

Sovereignty over occupied territory is not tran.sferred to the occupying power. 
Occupied territory may not be annexed and unilateral declarations to this effect 
are consequently void of legal effect. (Gastrin. The Present Law of War d 
Neutrality, 1954, pp. 215-6.) 

Another consideration is that, according to the prevailing view, an 
armistice agreement does not affect the status of the belligerent occu- 
pant who, unless otherwise stated in the agreement, remains bound in 
respect of the occupied territory by the Hague regulations which 
among other things also prohibit the annexation by the occupant of 
occupied territory. 

It follows from all this that just as the annexation of occupied ter- 
ritory by a belligerent occupant is obviously proliibited before the 
ceasefire or armistice, it is equally prohibited under international 
law after the ceasefire or armistice as long as they remain in force. 

Thus, it should occasion no surprise that the resolution adopted on 
April 24, 1950, in a joint session of both Houses of the Jordanian 
parliament proclaiming "its support for complete unity between the 
two sides of Jordan and the union into one state which is the Kingdom 
of Jordan," has not met with international recognition. In fact, there 
are only two states, as far as I could ascertain, who seem to have rec- 
ognized this extension of the territory of the Kingdom of Jordan, 
namely the United Kingdom and Pakistan. 

But even the United Kingdom in 1950 excluded from the scope of 
this recognition of the extension of Jordanian sovereignty eastern 

Israel's reaction to this purported annexation by Jordan of Judea 
and Samaria was expressed by the Israel foreign minister who told 
the Knesset : 

This is a unilateral act which in no way binds Israel. We have concluded an 
armistice agreement with the government of the Kingdom of Jordan. We are 
determined to abide strictly by its provisions. However, this agreement does 
not constitute any final political arrangement. No such arrangement is possible 
without negotiations between the parties and the conclusion of peace between 
them. It must, therefore, be clear that the question of the Arab-inhabited terri- 
tories west of the Jordan River remains open." (Divrei Haknesset, vol. 5, p. 

While Israel's negative reaction to the purported annexation by 
Jordan of Judea and Samaria was not unexpected, the same cannot be 
said of the reaction of the Arab States to these measures. They, too, 
voiced their strong opposition to the Jordanian annexation measures 
of April 1950. On April 13, 1950, that is only 11 days before the adop- 
tion of the Jordanian parliamentary resolution referred to above, the 
council of the Arab League decided that "annexation of Arab Pales- 
tine by any Arab State would be considered a violation of the League 
charter and subject to sanctions." 

Three weeks after the said proclamation in May 1950, the political 
committee of the Arab League in an extraordinary session held in 


Cairo decided without objection — and Jordan herself was absent from 
the meeting — that Jordanian annexation measure constituted a vio- 
lation of the council's resolution of April 13, 1950. It went on to con- 
sider the expulsion of Jordan from the League. 

It was decided that the discussion of punitive measures be postponed 
to another meeting set for June 12, 1950. At that meeting of the 
League council it had before it a Jordanian memorandum asserting 
that "annexation of Arab Palestine was irrevocable although without 
prejudice to any final settlement of the Palestinian question." 

This formula enabled the council to adopt a face-saving resolution 
under which "it was decided to treat the Arab part of Palestine an- 
nexed by Jordan as a trust in its hands until the Palestine case is fully 
solved in the interests of its inhabitants." 

Some 17 years later on May 31, 1967, that is less than 1 week before 
the outbreak of the Arab-Israel hostilities of June 1967, Jordan herself 
seems to have called into question, unwittingly perhaps, the validity 
of her annexation measures of April 1950 when her representatives 
told the council : 

There is an armistice agreement. The agreement did not fix boundaries. It 
fixed the demarcation line. The agreement did not pass judgment on rights, 
political, military, or otherwise. I know of no boundary. I know of a situation 
frozen by an armistice agreement. (U.N. Document S/PV 1345, p. 47.) 

If the analysis here submitted is correct, then the Kingdom of 
Jordan never acquired the status of a legitimate sovereign over Judea 
and Samaria. On the interpretation most favorable to the Kingdom of 
Jordan, her rights over Judea and Samaria could thus not exceed 
those of a belligerent occupant. That is its conclusion which is of de- 
cisive legal significance as regards to the nature and scope of the 
present rights of Israel over these territories. 

It will be clear already that the traditional rules of international 
law governing belligerent occupation are based on a twofold assump- 
tion, namely that it was the legitimate sovereign which was ousted 
from the territory under occupation, and that the ousting side qualifies 
as a belligerent occupant with respect to that territory. 

According to one of the better known American authorities on the 
international law of belligerent occupation, belligerent occupation, 
as regulated by customary and conventional international law, pre- 
supposes a state of affairs in which the sovereign, the legitimate gov- 
ernment of the occupied territory is at war with the government of 
the occupying forces. [Von Glahn, The Occupation of Enemy Terri- 
tory, 1957, p. 273.] 

This assumption of the concurrent existence in respect of the same 
territory of both the ousted legitimate sovereign and the belligerent 
occupant lies at the root of all those rules of international law which, 
while recognizing and sanctioning the occupant's right to administer 
the occupied territory, aim at the same time to safeguard the rights 
of the ousted sovereign. 

It would seem to follow that in a case like the present one where 
the ousted state never was the legitimate sovereign, those rules of 
belligerent occupation directed to safeguarding that sovereign's rights 
simply cannot find application. 

Consequently, Jordan is not entitled in respect of Judea and 
Samaria to the reversionary rights of sovereignty which international 


law confers on the legitimate sovereign vis-a-vis the belligerent occu- 
pant. Thus, whatever Jordanian rights existed in Judea and Samaria 
on the eve of the June war of 1967 within the framework of the Israel- 
Jordan general armistice agreement of 1949, ceased to exist when the 
Jordanian forces were ousted from the said territories as a result of 
the hostilities of June 1967. 

This conclusion is warranted by the fact that the Jordanian attack 
on the morning of June 5, 1967, along the Israel-Jordan armistice 
demarcation line, w^as in the nature of a material breach of the Israel- 
Jordan general armistice agreement, article I, paragraph 2, of which 
had provided that "no aggressive action by the armed forces — land, 
sea, or air — of either party shall be undertaken, planned, or threat- 
ened against the people or the armed forces of the other." 

As to the initiation of those hostilities by Jordan against Israel, we 
have the admission of King Hussein himself, as well as the report by 
the chief of staff of the U.N. truce supervision force in Jerusalem, the 
Norwegian general, Odd Bull. 

It is an accepted principle of international law which has now also 
found expression in 1969 Vienna Convention of the law of treaties that 
the material breach of the bilateral treaty by one of the parties entitles 
the other to invoke that breach as the ground for terminating the treaty 
or suspending its operation in whole or in part. 

The initiation by Jordan on June 5, 1967, of large-scale hostilities 
against Israel as a result of which Jordan lost control of Judea and 
Samaria was unquestionably in the nature of such a material breach 
following which Israel denounced, as she was entitled to do, that she 
regarded the armistice agreement with Jordan as terminated because 
of this violation of the agreement by Jordan. 

While Israel thus seized control of Judea and Samaria in 1967 in 
lawful exercise of her inherent right of self-defense, which, as is well 
known, is recognized also under article 51 of the U.N. Charter, the 
origins of Jordanian rule in Judea and Samaria lay, as has been amply 
shown above, in the aggression committed by Transjordan in 1948 
against the newly born State of Israel. In the course of that aggres- 
sion, Transjordan invaded the Palestinian territory. 

Prof. Stephen Schwebel, formerly of Johns Hopkins University, 
and currently the deputy legal adviser to the U.S. Department of State, 
has succinctly pointed out the important legal consequences flowing 
from this difference in the origins of the respective rights in East 
Jerusalem and in the other regions of Palestine which were overrun 
by the Arabs in 1948, and I quote him : 

Having regard to the consideration that Israel acted defensively in 1M8 and 
1967, and her Arab neighbors acted aggressively in liM8 and 1967, Israel has 
better title in the territory of what was Palestine than do Jordan and Egypt. 
( 64 AJIL ( 1970) , pp. 346-7. ) 

SchwebeFs assertion that Israel can show a better title than Jordan 
or Egypt to any territory that lives within the boundaries of the 
former Palestine mandate rests on solid legal foundations. It must be 
remembered that title to territory is normally based not on a claim of 
absolute validity — few such claims could be substantiated, not even 
those of the United States of America to the territory which it holds— 
but rather on one of relative validity. 


Thus for example, in the Minquier's arid Ecrelio's Case adjudicated 
by the International Court of Justice in a territorial dispute of 1953 
regarding certain islands in the English Chanel, the court, when called 
upon to resolve the territorial dispute between Britain and France, 
decided "to appraise the relative strength of the opposing claims to 

Since, in the present view, no state can make a legal claim to Judea 
and Samaria that is equal to that of Israel, this relative superiority of 
Israel may be sufficient under international law to make Israel's 
possession of those territories virtually indistinguishable from an 
absolute title to be valid erga omnes. The fact that Israel has so far 
refrained from making full exercise of these rights beyond the 
municipal limits of Jerusalem is perhaps best explained by the Israeli 
Government's reluctance to close certain political options in any future 

It is against the background of these legal considerations as distinct 
from the political considerations underlying the resolutions of various 
international bodies that the questions surrounding the juridical status 
of Judea and Samaria have to be viewed. 

I would, therefore, conclude by saying that Israel cannot be con- 
sidered as an occupying power within the meaning given to this term 
in international law in any part of the former Palestine mandate, 
including Judea and Samaria. 

Also, as a result, Israel's right to Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza 
Strip are not subject to the limitations imposed by international law 
on a belligerent occupant. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator Abourezk. I have to say, Mr. Blum, that I happen to be a 
lawyer myself and not an international lawyer, but that is one of the 
most ingenious arguments I have ever heard to establish the claim of 
Israel over those particular territories. 

Mr. Blum. I happen to be in good company with Prof. Stephen 
Schwebel and Prof. Julius Stone, and Professor Lauterpacht who are 
great international legal authorities, not political authorities. They 
have given some time and reflection to this problem. 

Senator Abourezk. You imply but do not state it directly, and you 
seem to have left hanging the question of who has actual sovereignty 
over the West Bank, the territory you call Judea and Samaria. Would 
you say that Israel has absolute sovereignty over those territories ? 

Mr. Blum. Let me perhaps first react to the question of terminol- 
ogy — the territory which I call Judea and Samaria. It is only right 
that we all call it Judea and Samaria for the simple reason that the 
term "West Bank" is suggestive and really prejudices the issue which 
we discuss here. It has no meaning except in the context of the West 
Bank of the Kingdom of Jordan. This is precisely the question to 
which I address myself here. Otherwise, geographically the West Bank 
has no meaning. Tel Aviv and Haifa are as much on the West Bank of 
the Jordan River as are Hebron and Nablus. Because of this I think 
Judea and Samaria are the correct geographical descriptions of the 
area which we are dealing with, just as we refer to the northern part 
of Israel as Galilee and to the southern part of Israel as Negeb. It is 
only appropriate for us to call the central part of what was Palestine 
as Judea and Samaria. This is the neutral geographical description. 


Senator Abourezk. If you accept the definition of Judea and 
Samaria that Prime Minister Begin pronounces — that it is the his- 
torical land of Israel, isn't the use of your terminology calling it 
Judea and Samaria presupposing the issue on the other side as 

Mr. Blum. No, sir. I do not think so. I would just as much call the 
coastal plain of Sharon, the southern part the Negeb. I do not think 
it really prejudges the issue on the Golan that Wft call it the Golan 
Heights which is the correct geographical description of that region. 

Coming now to the question of sovereignty, I would have to say 
this. Yes, indeed, I consider Israel as the potential sovereign over 
Judea and Samaria. 

Senator Abourezk. What does that mean, potential ? 

Mr. Blum. The moment Israel wishes to extend its law and juris- 
diction and administration to Judea and Samaria, it is entitled to do 
so and in fact this extension of Israeli sovereignty to any ten-itory of 
the former Palestine mandate effectively under Israeli control has been 
recognized by the outside world. Ever since 1948 Israel has had effec- 
tive control over various regions of the former Palestine mandate that 
under the projected Jewish state of the partition recommendation 
would have been situated beyond the boundaries of Israel — for in- 
stance, Western Galilee or Ben-Gurion International Airport. 

If I correctly understand the position of those who oppose Israel 
in the present day international arena, they basically call, at least 
outwardly, for Israel's withdrawal to the former armistice demarca- 
tion lines and to convert those armistice demarcation lines into inter- 
national boundaries. Those boundaries, of course, would include cer- 
tain territories which came under Israeli jurisdiction precisely in the 
same manner like Ben-Gurion International Airport and the city of 
Jaffa and West Jerusalem and the Jerusalem corridor. 

I see no difference from the legal point of view between the juridical 
status of western Galilee and Nazareth, Ben-Gurion International 
Airport, and Jaffa on the one hand, and Judea and Samaria, includ- 
ing East Jerusalem on the other. Once the armistice agreement was 
terminated, we were back from the legal point of view to the situation 
as it existed prior to the conclusion of the armistice agreement. 

So, I see no obstacle from the legal point of view to Israel exercising 
its law and applying its jurisdiction to any territory of the former 
Palestine mandate without formally annexing it because I think the 
term "annexation" would not be appropriate. A state annexes a terri- 
tory that has been ceded to it by another state and which prior to that 
cession had been part, of the sovereign domain of the ceding state. This 
is not the case with respect to Judea and Samaria. Therefore, I think 
the correct construction is that Israel extends its administration and 
jurisdiction to the formerly mandated territories in Palestine. 

Senator Abourezk. Under your argument then, if a legal battle, if 
I may call it that, to the West Bank falls, then Israel's legal title 
to Galilee and to Ben-Gurion International Airport would also fall? 

Mr. Blum. No. This is not a correct reading and interpretation of 
what I said. 

Senator Abourezk. I thought that is what you said. 


Mr. Blum. I am not calling into question Israel's right. But what 
I have been saying is that even the most extreme opponents of Israel 
these days do not call into question Israel's eventual right to regard 
Ben-Gurion International Airport as part of her sovereign territory. 

But I have invited you, Mr. Chairman, to react in a similar manner 
to the remaining parts of the Palestinian mandate because other- 
wise we would be selective. From the legal point of view this would 
be hardly justifiable. 

Senator Abourezk. What other parts of the Palestine mandate exist 
which are not under Israeli control ? 

Mr. Blum. The former western Palestine mandate is now under 
Israeli control. All of it, and as I say, I regard Israel's rights there as 
better and superior to that of any other country. 

Senator Abourezk. I think you misunderstood me. Are there any 
portions of the original mandate that are not under Israeli control? 

Mr. Blum. Certainly, more than two-thirds of it. 

Senator Abourezk. Would you define it? 

Mr. Blum. All east of the Jordan River. 

Senator Abourezk. How far east? 

Mr. Blum. As far as the Iraqi boundary because the original 
Palestine mandate had boundaries with Lebanon and Syria in the 
north, Iraq in the east, and Saudi Arabia and Egypt in the south, and 
the Mediterranean in the west. 

Senator Abourezk. So then Israel has potential sovereignty over 
that territory as well ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Blum. No ; I did not claim that. In 1946 the eastern part of the 
Palestine mandate was separated from the rest of the mandate, that is, 
two-thirds of the territories that were earmarked for the Palestine 
mandate which is the Jewish national home, in 1922. They were then 
detached in 1946 from western Palestine and an independent Arab 
state, an independent Palestinian Arab state, was set up in more than 
two-thirds of the Palestine mandate by Great Britain with the subse- 
quent approval of the United Nations General Assembly. 

So I do not question the validity of those measures. In fact, I be- 
lieve that as a result of those measures of 1946 the Jordan River 
became an international boundary for Jordan and Palestine alike 
which Jordan could not lawfully transgress, could not lawfully cross 
in 1948. 

Senator Abourezk. In giving the historical background of this 
controversy in the Middle East, you seem to have glossed over certain 
facts which perhaps ought to be included. You use your stated facts as 
a basis for the establishment of whatever territory Israel might want 
within the area you defined as part of the original mandate subject to 
potential sovereignty by Israel. 

In your opinion as an international lawyer, does the U.N. Charter 
allow the acquisition of territory by force or is it prohibited by the 
charter ? 

Mr. Blum. I believe that under the U.N. Charter the acquisition of 
territory, the acquisition of sovereignty, by force over foreign terri- 
tory ifi absolutely prohibited. 

Let me add this. It is precisely because of this view of mine that I 
believe that Jordan, as a foreign occupant of Palestinian territory, 


was precluded from acquiring sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. 
The U.X. Charter does not address itself — and I could supply you 
with the necessary authorities on this point and there has been a lot 
of writing on this subject recently — but the charter does not address 
itself to the questions of belligerent occupation, but the rights of a 
belligerent occupant are regulated by the documents governing bel- 
ligerent occupation. The belligerent occupant's rights are lawful as 
long as the status of military occupation is not replaced by a perma- 
nent arrangement, generally a peace treaty. 

"VVliat I did, however, say — and I would like to reemphasize this — is 
that I believe that as far as the territoiy of the former Palestine man- 
date is concerned — and now I am talking about western Palestine 
which is less than one-third of the original Palestine mandate of 
1922 — and as far as the territory of the former Palestine mandate is 
concerned Israel would not "acquire" sovereignty over those territories, 
they not being foreign territories as regards Israel. 

That is for the reasons I have tried to explain at some length and 
which you were good enough to listen to patiently. 

So, I believe that Israel would not be acquiring foreign territory 
in Judea and Samaria. This does not fall within the said prohibition 
of the U.N. Charter. 

Incidentally, the United Nations Charter, to be very precise, speaks 
of the prohibition of the use of force. The prohibition of the acquisi- 
tion of territory by the use of force is something that has been logically 
concluded from it. It is not laid down in so many words in the char- 
ter. If you want to be accurate about that that is the way it is. 

Senator Abourezk. Then to try to establish and include some of the 
facts which were omitted from the testimony, do you believe that the 
establishment of Israel as a state in 1948 was done under the provi- 
sions of the United Nations Charter or in violation of the charter? 

Mr. Blum. No state is established under the charter or in violation 
of the charter, simply because, as far as international law is con- 
cerned, states are born out of wedlock so to speak. States are not bom 
in conformity with the existing legal framework. For instance, the 
United States of America was not born exactly in conformity with 
the laws governing at the time in this part of the world. It was an up- 
rising against the legitimate sovereign. I do not mean to decry or to 
deplore that action that was taken 200 years ago. I simply point out 
the fact that, as far as international law is concerned, every state is as 
legal or illegal, as you want to view it, from the point of view of inter- 
national law. 

This applies to all Latin American States. This applies to the Soviet 
Union which regards itself as a new state having broken the constitu- 
tional continuity with its predecessor. This applies to Red China. This 
applies to Africa and practically to the whole world. It even applies 
to the old countries like Britain and France with one important dif- 
ference that they are old enough and they are so old that at the time 
of their birth when the deficiencies and defects of their birth from 
the point of view of internatonal law could have been detected, the 
mass media, the television people, were not around. 

So, it is a little bit more difficult to document. 

Senator Abourezk. But what we are talking about, Mr. Blum, is 
not what happened 200 years ago. But because of states conquering, 


annexing or making other states part of their own territory 100 or 
200 years ago, the U.N. Charter was drafted and signed by most of 
the nations of the world. 

I think we have to talk in terms of whether or not we intend to live 
up to the principles of that charter. Do we, at some point in the 20th 
century, after the signing of the U.N. Charter, then stop acquiring 
territory by force or do we ignore the charter and make exceptions for 
various countries, for Israel, for example ? This is what we need to talk 
about. This is what my question is directed to. 

Let me ask tliis recurring question. If the U.N. Charter, either by 
implication or by direct enunciation, prohibits the acquisition of ter- 
ritory by force, doesn't that, even under your own terms, call into 
question the original establishment of Israel as a State by a matter of 
force of arms in 1947 and 1948 ? 

Mr. Blum. No, not at all. I think I have given some quotations from 
the Security Council records to point out that it was very surely the 
consensus of the membership of the United Nations in 1948 that it was 
not the State of Israel that was created as a result of an unlawful 
use of force but, quite to the contrary, because of the Arab use of force 
in 1948, there was such an unlawful use of force. I have extensively 
quoted from a statement made by the then representative of the 
United States in the United Nations. I have given the quotation from 
his counterpart, not from the Soviet Union but from the Ukraine, 
whatever the differences may be between the Soviet Union and the 

This was virtually the consensus of the membership of the United 
Nations in 1948 that the State of Israel was defending itself against 
an unlawful aggression committed against the State of Israel from 
the very moment of its inception. 

Senator Abourezk. In spite of what you say the consensus of opin- 
ion was at the time, I think you ought to concede that Israel was not 
established as a result of a democratic election. Won't you concede 

Mr. Blum. I find this a curious argument, if I may say so. 

With due respect, as far as I know, Israel is the only State in the 
Middle East which has had uninterruptedly democratic universal elec- 
tions ever since 1949. 

Senator Abourezk. Would that include all the residents of that 

Mr. Blum. All the residents of the State of Israel — Jews and non- 
Jews alike. 

Senator Abourezk. Including the ones driven out ? 

Mr. Blum. May I add here that we would have loved to have had our 
general elections not in 1949 but at some earlier date. We could not 
do that because we were engaged in a war of self-defense and fighting 
for our veiy lives. Therefore, it was a provisional Government of 
Israel that ruled until January 1949. However, even the provisional 
Government of Israel grew out of the elected representation of the 
Jewish community in Palestine, elected by the Jewish community of 
Palestine during the mandate period. 

As far as international law is concerned, general elections are not 
a precondition for the legality of the state. If you look around the 


Senator Abourezk. I 'm not saying that. 

Mr. Blum. You have 120 out of ioO states which have dubious elec- 
tions if they have them at all. 

Senator Abourezk. Let's go back to the simple point. I asked you 
if Israel had indeed established itself as a state as a result of force. 
You will not talk about that. Then I asked you if it was done through 
elections and you wouldn't talk about that. 

How were they established if they were not established either way ? 

Mr. Blum. The answer is very simple. Practically every state, with 
the exception of the select fortunate few like Lichtenstein and ]VIonaco 
and Luxembourg and perhaps a few other ministates, practically all 
states have to assert their existence also through the insistence on 
physical force and the will to defend themselves. 

I'm dealing with different aspects of the situation. I am dealing 
with the legal aspects. If the legal aspects would not have been backed 
up and supported by the physical strength of the State of Israel, then 
obviously I would not sit here in front of you here today to speak 
about the sovereignty of Israel on any part of the Palestine mandate. 
That is true of any given country. 

Senator Abourezk. This is true of Israel ; right ? 

Mr. Blum. It is true of any country. 

Senator Abourezk. I understand that. But is it true of Israel? 

Mr. Blum. If its rights are not supported by physical force, then 
those rights will be kept in abeyance, I would suspect, by the interna- 
tional community. 

Senator Abourezk. I think we have established that Israel estab- 
lished itself as a state through the use of force. 

Mr. Blum. No ; Israel established itself like any other state from the 
point of view of international law because the State of Israel, like 
any other state, had to meet, and met, the requirements of statehood 
as laid down in any textbook of international law which are certain 
well-defined territories, citizens who are willing to accept the allegi- 
ance to the state, an effective administration, and recognition by the 
international community. Israel is no different from any other state. 

The fact that Israel had to fight a war of self-defense from the mo- 
ment of its inception is a curious way of challenging Israel's right to 
exist. I wish we didn't have to fight that war of independence in 1948. 

Senator Abourezk. I think you probably had to fight because the 
State of Israel, in its present form, could not have been established 
with an election of the people there. I would submit that the reason 
it could not is because the Palestinian-Arab population was in a maj- 
ority at that time until they were driven out in sufficient numbers to 
make itself the minority. 

Mr. Blum. We could not have established in 1948 the State of Israel 
without fighting for its existence and its independence because the 
neighboring Arab States and the Arabs of Palestine were opposed to 
the recommendation of the U.N. General Assembly that would have 
partitioned Palestine for a second time and would have left seven- 
eighths of the original Palestine mandate in Arab hands. They were 
not content with having seven-eighths of it. They wanted all eight- 
eighths of it. That was the reason. 

Senator Abourezk. But in view of the fact that the U.N. resolution 
is recommending the partitioning and it is not binding — and you said 


that in your testimony — then the only other alternative, other than 
fighting and taking the territory by force in order to establish the 
State of Israel, would be to hold an election of some sort. Isn't that 
accurate ? 

Mr. Blum. No ; it is not. 

Senator Aboukezk. What other way could you have done it with- 
out the use of force ? 

Mr. Blum. I am trying to differentiate between the use of force, 
which is generally speaking unlawful under the U.N. Charter, and 
the use of force in self-defense which is mentioned under article 51 
of the U.N. Charter. 

All the authorities, except for the Arab authorities on this matter 
and including the Eastern European authorities in 1948, were agreed 
that it was the Arab States who used unlawful force in violation of 
article II, paragraph 4, of the charter and it was the State of Israel 
that was exercising its right of self-defense. I find it very difficult to 
turn this construction around. 

Senator Abourezk. I don't think I started turning things around. 
It wasn't I who started it. 

You are ignoring, if I am not mistaken, the use of force by the 
Jewish settlement at the time. There were three distinct, separate 
armed forces units operating before the State of Israel was estab- 
lished — the Haganah, the Stern, and the Irgun. They had operated 
for a number of years and they were using force. In fact, the terrorist 
groups were using force to drive the British out; isn't that right? 

Mr. Blum. The various Jewish underground movements, not so 
much the Haganah except for a short period of time, but definitely 
the other two organizations which you mentioned. They did use force 
with the view to removing British presence from the territory of the 
former Palestine mandate. 

Senator Abourezk. For a specific reason to establish Israel; isn't 
that right? 

Mr. Blum. Yes, and it is only fair to point out that they claimed at 
the time that the sole justification for British presence in Palestine, 
which was not part of the British sovereign domain, was to encourage 
the establishment of the Jewish national home in Palestine. The 
moment that Britain reneged on this international obligation of hers 
which was the sole source of her rule in Palestine, she was not entitled 
to remain there. So, that was the justification for using force by the 
Jewish underground movements against the British. 

But strictly speaking, I think this is irrelevant when it comes to 
discussing the question before us. The question before us is a different 

Senator Abourezk. It is relevant in terms of using a partial set of 
facts for the basis of your legal argument giving Israel a right to 
practically anything within its vision. 

Mr. Blum. May I point out the distinction ? 

Senator Abourezk. Certainly. 

Mr. Blum. The distinction is that we have, for present purposes, to 
distinguish between the international use of force and civil disorders 
not amounting to an international use of force. The U.N. Charter and 
international law are not concerned basically with internal disturb- 


ances. For instance, the Baader-Meinhof disturbances in Germany 
are not a matter, as long as it is confined to Germany, for international 

International law becomes interested in violence and the use of force 
whenever it transcends national boundaries. 

This was the case in 1948, as far as Arab military intervention in 
Palestine was concerned. These were outside powers who, according 
to some speakers in the Security Council and elsewhere in 1948, had 
no legitimate business on Palestinian soil. 

Senator Abotjrezk. That brings up another question, Professor 

You say that Israel has a right to potential sovereignty over any- 
thing within the mandated power. You justified the establishment of 
settlements on those territories based upon that legal premise. What 
about the Sinai ? Was that part of the mandate ? 

Mr. Bltjm. No ; it was not. 

Senator Abourezk. Israel has settlements on the Sinai, doesn't it? 

Mr. Blum. Yes. 

Senator Abourezk. How can you justify that? 

Mr. Blum. I would certainly not apply this argument to the Sinai, 
I would have to say one thing. As far as the interpretation of article 
49 is concerned, as was suggested to this distinguished committee by 
Mrs. Hauser 

Senator Abourezk. I am sorry but that was a House committee. She 
didn't testify here but in the House of Representatives. That's all 
right ; go ahead. 

Mr. Blum. I see. 

But as far as article 49 is concerned, the interpretation offered by 
Mrs. Hauser, with which I happen to associate myself, also finds 
application in the Sinai. 

Senator Abourezk. It is perfectly legal to do it because Israel is 
exempted from article 49 of the Red Cross Convention ? 

Mr. Blum. No, not that it is exempted. These were not my words. 
What I said was that article 49 envisions certain situations of the dis- 
placement of the local population for the purpose of the mass transfer 
of the occupiers' population into occupied territory. 

What I am suggesting is that, given the figures which were given 
by Mrs. Hauser, and given the situation on the ground, the situation 
envisioned by article 49 does not apply. 

I would add one more word of caution. I say this merely as a word 
of caution. I have not gone into this question. I have not gone into the 
question as to the length of the duration of the belligerent occupation 
provisions of international law. Belligerent occupation exceeding a 
long period of time simply cannot work under the same constraints 
as the normal belligerent occupation, if the term "normal" can be 
applied to a situation of this kind. Obviously the Red Cross Conven- 
tion and other international instruments have in view the "normal" 
situation under which the hostilities are ceased or terminated and you 
have an interim period of a few weeks or months of belligerent occu- 
pation followed by peace negotiations which finally dispose of the 


The longer such a situation lasts, the more difficult it becomes. This 
is recognized also by certain provisions of these conventions, that it 
becomes more difficult to abide literally by those provisions. 

Also, in order to protect the interests of the local population, you 
have this situation. So, we would have to look into this aspect of the 
duration of an occupation. I must confess I have not looked sufficiently 
into that problem to enable me to intelligently react to this matter. 

Senator Abourezk. I have one other question. If we accept your 
argument that Israel has a form of modified sovereignty or potential 
sovereignty over the West Bank, do you have any comment or obser- 
vation then on the treatment by the Israeli government of its citizens 
there? There is a total denial of legal rights and human rights. Do you 
approve of that or disapprove ? 

Mr. Blum. What I said was that Israel has not extended its law, 
jurisdiction, or administration to Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip, 

The residents of those territories are overwhelmingly Jordanian cit- 
izens. The situation de facto is that Israel behaves in that territory to- 
ward the local population as if it were bound by the Fourth Geneva 
Convention and all its humanitarian provisions. 

The Fourth Geneva Convention — and I was literally astonished to 
listen to the previous speaker on this matter because obviously he ig- 
nored this when he spoke about certain political rights — the Fourth 
Geneva Red Cross Convention envisions a situation under which the 
local population would not be entitled to full political rights because 
of the unusual situation in which it finds itself. 

What the Fourth Geneva Red Cross Convention is concerned with 
are civil and religious rights, property rights, the right of access to 
courts, and so on. I think Israel's record on these matters is not some- 
thing that can be derided in the manner in which the previous speaker 
has done it. 

^Vhen he speaks about political demonstrations and the like, then 
obviously we are shifting to a different sphere. We are shifting to 
the political rights which are invariably curtailed in occupied ter- 
ritories by the State that at least for the moment does not claim sov- 
ereignty and has not turned the population into its citizens. 

That was the situation in Germany between 1945 and 1949. That 
was the situation in Japan of MacArthur during the first years of 
American occupation in Japan. 

I think Israel is no exception except perhaps for one important 
point. Israel has given a great amount of freedom of movement from 
the territories to the neighboring countries, back and forth. You will 
not find many other countries in the world where, before the conclu- 
sion of peace, you would find so many tourists coming to the occu- 
pied territories from enemy countries as you find in the case of Israel, 
in spite of all the security risks involved. 

Senator Abourezk. I would like to ask you again if you approve 
or disapprove of the denial of legal rights and human rights of the 
people living in the West Bank ? 

Mr. Bmivr. The way the question is phrased reminds me of the 
question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" 


Senator Abotjrezk. Perhaps you could rephrase the question for 

Mr. Blum. The way you ask the question, Mr. Chairman, is ''Do I 
approve the denial of human rights?" It would seem to presuppose the 
fact that there is such a thing. I wouldn't want these words to be put 
in my mouth. 

Senator Abourezk. There has been ample evidence of it. "VVe have 
the previous witness. There have been innumerable television and 
newspaper reports about the denial of human rights. 

In fact, I personally know of the former president or existing 
president of Birzeit University who told me that he was taken sum- 
marily with a bag over his head and dumped across the Lebanese 
border in the middle of the night with no trial and no hearing and 
no charges. Let's take that one example. Do you approve of that ? 

Mr. Blum. Do you want me to specifically react to that question 
of deportation? 

Senator Abourezk. Yes. 

Mr. Blum. Let me tell you this, Mr. Chairman. The deportation 
provisions are to be found in the emergency regulations which we in- 
herited from the British mandatoi-y authorities and which in turn 
both Israel and Jordan inherited in their respective parts of Pales- 
tine which they controlled after 1948. 

These emergency regulations are on the statute book also in Israel 
to the present day. It is not correct to state that they have been 
abolished in Israel. I for one would be happy if they were abolished, 
but it so happens that for a variety of reasons successive Israeli Gov- 
vernments have not done so. 

So, these deportations are not something that Israel has thought up 
and invented. In fact, this as I said is inherited from the British 
mandate period. It is the law, the local law, as we found it in Judea 
and Samaria in June 1967. 

As far as the deportations are concerned, it is a curious deporta- 
tion indeed — as I might add — when you take a Jordanian citizen and 
you put him across the Jordan River and you send him to Jordan. 
This has happened in most of the cases involved. There have been 
about 100 — I don't think I have an accurate figure but I think it is 
close — but it is only fair that we mention the numbers involved. I 
think there have been about 100 deportations of this kind of about 
100 individuals, and except for 2 or 3 they were all sent to Jordan, 
to their country of nationality. So it is not being sent into exile. 

Senator Abourezk. I assume they have a home in Jordan? 

Mr. Blum. With regard to these two or three cases of people being 
sent to Lebanon instead of Jordan, there was strong criticism in Israel 
at the time on the ground that it would have been preferable from a 
legal point to send them to their country of national origin rather 
than to a country which would have been a foreign country from 
a legal point of view. Some displeasure has been expressed over these 
deportations by the Israeli Supreme Court at the time. 

Senator Abourezk. I find the rationale for taking a person out of 
his home where he is living on the West Bank and dumping him in 
Jordan simply because that happens to be his passport nationality be- 
fore 1967 is stretching it very thin, extremely thin. 


Mr. Blum. I find that is a very unhappy situation the world over. 
I think to try to apply to the State of Israel the whole gamut of in- 
ternational sets and standards as they apply in the country which 
fortunately has never been invaded by any foreign country for the 
last 160 years, that is to try to apply all these rules in their entirety 
to a country which in its 29 years of existence has not had one day 
of peace and which is constantly threatened to the present day with 
destruction by some states at least and some organizations at least is 
a little bit surprising. 

Senator Abourezk. It is not surprising in view of the fact that we 
constantly hear from Israel's supporters that it is a truly democratic 
country which treats its Arabs very properly. We hear that constantly. 
Of coure, that is subject to change and I was trying to raise that 
question here today. 

So, on the one hand if somebody points out that their Arabs are not 
being treated properly, then the excuse is that we are at war. I think 
we ought to go back further. You attempted to talk around this. 

You have attempted to talk around this but the fact is that Israel 
is at war simply because it took territory by force. I hope you will not 
expect people to give you an award for that. At least I would hope not. 
The resistance to Israel taking that territory by force is what causes 
the fighting today and will cause it in the future. I hope that you or 
Israel would get an award, an international award, for taking the ter- 
ritory from somebody else. 

Instead you are getting what one would expect and that is continued 
warfare. I don't know what else you would expect from it. 

Mr. Blum. I think it is misleading to assume that the taking of a 
territory by Israel in 1967 created the tension between the Israelis 
and the neighboring countries. This is losing sight of the true his- 
torical perspective. It was in 1948 that the Arabs begrudged any ter- 
ritory of Palestine to the Jews. 

Wherever we would have established our ministate on any part of 
the Palestine mandate the Arabs would have begrudged it lor the 
simple reason that they have never come to grips with the existence of 
a Jewish people as distinct from a Jewish religion. It has been their 
position all along that Judaism is merely a religion and as such is not 
entitled to a state of its own, irrespective of its boundaries. 

The 1967 war and the taking of territories is a result, not a cause, 
of this unhappy situation. 

I am definitely certain that Israel is a democratic state, one of the 
very few democratic states, unfortunately, left in our world. But it is 
a democratic state of war and just as Great Britain, which never ceased 
to be a democratic state not even during World War II, had to take 
certain measures that the Britains would not have taken in peacetime — 
so the State of Israel equally has had to resort to certain measures, war- 
time measures. This does not imply, as you seem to have assumed, Mr. 
Chairman, that Israel has been treating its Arabs — and I think you 
spoke of "their Arabs or the Arabs of Israel." We have not deprived 
them of their human rights. 

When you speak of Israel's Arabs, I think you have in mind the 
citizens of Israel of Arab origin. We have about half a million of 

20-488 O - 78 


These people enjoy the full protection of Israeli law although they 
are exempted from some duties under Israeli law such as the duty of 
military service. They serve in the defense forces on a voluntary basis 
only. There are some who do that. 

Senator Abourezk. Can those Arabs form their own political 
parties ? 

Mr. Blum. Yes, indeed. They have done so in the past. 

Senator Abourezk. Which parties are formed by those Arabs ? 

Mr. Blum. There are a number of Arab members of the Knesset, 

Senator Abourezk. I know that but they are members of an existing 
political party. 

Mr. Blum. I'm sorry. They represent Arab tickets and they run on 
Arab lists and not on Jewish lists. 

Senator Abourezk. You say the Arabs are entitled to form political 
parties of their own ? 

Mr. Blum. We're not talking about the Arabs of Israel. We're talk- 
ing about the citizens of Israel. They are not only entitled to do so 
but they have done so. They have run on various separate Arab plat- 
forms and Arab lists. They have been elected to the Knesset. We have 
had a deputy speaker, an Arab, of the Knesset who came to the Knesset 
on an Arab list. We have had a deputy minister of health, an Arab who 
incidentally did not run on an Arab list but on a Jewish list. He was 
an Arab representative on a Jewish list. 

So I think it is inaccurate to say that Arabs are not entitled to form 
political parties. They have done so. 

Senator Abourezk. Can you give me the name of an Arab political 
party ? 

Mr. Blum. Progress and Enlightenment — they usually have double 
names. The Bedouins of the Negeb are usually running on a separate 
list of their own. Fraternity and Peace and names like that. 

Senator Abourezk. Thank you. 

Well, I have no more questions. I want to express my thanks to you 
for your appearance. We appreciate it very much. 

Our final witness today will be Prof. W. T. Mallison, professor of 
law and director of the international and comparative law program at 
George Washington University here in Wasliington, D.C. Professor 
Mallison is a specialist on the legality or illegality of West Bank 

Professor Mallison, we would like to welcome vou at this time. You 
may proceed. 


Mr. Mallison. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Since there are basic diflferenc«« between Professor Blum and myself, 
I want to point out to you that these differences are professional ones. 
I have had the pleasure of having Dr. Blum speak in my international 
law classes at George Washington and present the Zionist views. I 


hope veiy muoh that he will do that again while he is here in Washing- 

It is a privilege to appear before this subcommittee and to make a 
statement on tliis important subject of tlie international hmnani'tarian 
law for tlie protection of civilian pei-sons in occupied territories. 



The four Geneva Conventions for tlie Protection of War Victims of 
August 12, 1949, were written in the shadow of the Second World 
War. The first of these Conventions is for the protection of wounded 
and sick militaiy pei-sonnel, including aviators, in land warfare; the 
second is for tlie protection of wounded, sick and shipwrecked person- 
nel, including aviators, in naval warfare ; and the tliird protects pris- 
oners of war. The fourth convention is the Geneva Convention Kela- 
tive to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, [1955] 
3 U.S.T. 3515, T.I.A.S. No. 3365, 75 U.N.T.S. 287. The present analy- 
sis is based upon the primary legal sources which govern the matter 
and particularly emphasizes the Geneva Civilians Convention of 1949. 

All four of these Geneva Conventions for the Protection of War 
Victims have been ratified by the U.S. Government as treaties and are 
part of the supreme law of the land under the supremacy clause of 
the U.S. Constitution. These same four Conventions have been ratified 
by all of the state parties to the continuing hostilities in the Middle 
East. In addition, the Palestine Liberation Organization has deposited 
an instrument of accession to the four Geneva Conventions. 

The international humanitarian law of armed conflict for the pro- 
tection of war victims, which includes the customary law on the subject 
as well as conventional or treaty law, is human rights law in the 
most fundamental sense. It provides a basic or minimum standard of 
human rights protections for individuals which are to be applied in 
the situation of war or international armed conflict, including bellig- 
erent occupation. The governments which have created this law have 
acted on the assumption that even urgent military necessity cannot be 
allowed to deprive human beings of certain elementary protections. 
The overriding purpose of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, as reflected 
in the negotiating history, was to avoid a repetition of the atrocities 
and massive deprivations of human rights which were inflicted upon 
civilian populations during the Second World War by the Nazis in 
Europe and Russia and by the Japanese militarists in Asia. 

The U.S. Government has been the preeminent leader in this branch 
of human rights law since President Lincoln proclaimed "Instructions 
for the Government of the Armies of the United States in the Field" 
as General Order No. 100 in 1863. This statement of the humanitarian 
law, known as Lieber's code because its principal author was Prof. 
Francis Lieber of Columbia College, became the basis for the subse- 
quent international conventions on the subject, including the present 
Geneva Conventions. Although it was applied in a civil war, it was 
widely recognized as being the outstanding codification of the interna- 
tional humanitarian law. 



In a number of the post-World War II war crimes trials conducted 
by the Western Allies, Nazi defendants employed elaborate argii- 
ments, including questioning the title to "occupied territory," to avoid 
the application of the then effective customary and conventional in- 
ternational humanitarian law as criteria for judging the criminality 
or innocence of their conduct. Although these arguments were re- 
jected by the war crimes tribunals, the four Geneva Conventions of 
1949 were written in careful language so as to avoid the possibility 
of raising these defenses again. The common article 2 of all four 
Conventions provides that the Conventions, "Shall apply to all cases 
of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise * * * 
even if the state of war is not recognized * * * ," 

The same article also provides that the Convention shall also apply 
to "all" situations "of partial or total occupation of the territory of a 
high contracting party * * * ." 

The Conventions are thereby applied to the facts of international 
conflict, and the lack of a declaration of war is irrelevant. The Con- 
ventions also provide no basis for a "just war" theory which would 
deprive an alleged aggressor of the benefits of the law while saving 
those benefits for an alleged defender. In the same way, the negotiat- 
ing history makes it clear, since the application of the Conventions is 
mandatory, that questions as to de jure titles to territory are not in- 
volved and that the Convention must be applied in occupied territory 
whatever the claims concerning the de jure status of that territory. 

The negotiating history of article 47 of the Civilians Convention 
indicates that its purpose is to avoid a repetition of the Nazi and 
Japanese militarist practices of World War II whereby the inhab- 
itants of occupied territories were deprived of the protection of the 
humanitarian law by the device of purported changes in the local law 
including purported annexations of the occupied territory by the oc- 
cupying power. 

Article 47 provides in full : 

Protected i)ersons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived in any 
case or in any manner whatsoever of the benefits of the present Convention by 
any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the 
institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded 
between the authorities of the occupied territories and the occupying power, nor 
by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory. 

In spite of these treaty provisions, the Government of Israel, which 
participated in the negotiations of the four Geneva Conventions and 
was one of the first to ratify them, has not recognized the legal ap- 
plicability of the Geneva Ci\alians Convention in occupied territory 
nor has it applied the Convention as a matter of fact. Article 158 of 
the Convention makes it impossible for a state party to denounce the 
Civilians Convention while it is involved in a conflict including a 
belligerent occupation by providing that no denunciation of the 
Convention shall take effect "until after peace has been concluded" 
and until protected persons have been accorded their rights under 
the Convention. 


The Government of Israel, consequently, has had to attempt another 
method to avoid the application of the Convention. Dr. Yehuda Z. 
Blum provided an attempt in an article entitled, "The Missing Rever- 
sioner : Eeflections on the Status of Judea and Samaria," 3 Israel Law 
Review 279 (1968). I have here a pamphlet reprint of his article which 
has been distributed widely in the United States. His statement to this 
committee, which I have just heard, is based on this article. 

'VVliile his government acted entirely consistently with Dr. Blum's 
arguments from the beginning of the June 1967 belligerent occupa^ 
tions, it is particularly significant that Mr. Menachem Begin, the pres- 
ent Israel Prime Minister, accepted Dr. Blum's arguments from the 

Dr. Blum's central thesis is that the application of the law of bel- 
ligerent occupation, in general, and the Civilians Convention, in par- 
ticular, is based upon the presupposition that the "legitimate sover- 
eign" — to use Dr. Blum's words — of the occupied territory has been 
displaced by the occupant. The claim is that Jordan and Egypt were 
not legitimate sovereigns in the West Bank of the River Jordan and 
in the Gaza Strip, respectively, since they were there as a result of their 
alleged acts of aggression. 

In this connection, both Mr. Begin and Dr. Blum have frequently 
reiterated that only two states ha\'e recognized the Jordanian claim 
to the title of the West Bank. This is exactly two more states than 
have recognized the Israeli claim to the West Bank of the Jordan. 
Begin and Blum fail to mention that Jordan annexed the West Bank 
subject to Palestinian rights. 

Since the requirement of Dr. Blum's presupposition is alleged to be 
unfulfilled, the conclusion is then reached that the Government of 
Israel is not required to apply the international humanitarian law 
for the benefit of the inhabitants of occupied territory. 

Even Dr. Blum's arguments do not attempt to explain the failure 
of the Government of Israel to apply the Civilians Convention in the 
occupied Golan Heights, since it has not yet been alleged that the 
Government of Syria acquired this territory now under belligerent 
occupation as a result of Syrian aggression. In the same way, it has not 
yet claimed that Egypt lacks title to the Sinai. Dr. Blum's additional 
objective in criticizing the Jordanian and Egyptian titles is to enhance 
the Government of Israel's permanence in the territories and acquisi- 
tion of the same territories under the claim "the better title" as it has 
just been described by him. 

Israel's main claim to title, apart from supposed religious arguments 
used for political purposes, is the U.N. General Assembly Palestine 
Partition Resolution, No. 181 (II) of November 29, 1947. The Declara- 
tion of Establishment of the State of Israel states that this partition 
resolution is the ground for the legality of the State of Israel. Under 
the tenns of this resolution, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are far 
beyond the boundaries allocated to the State of Israel. They were ex- 
pressly allocated to the Palestine Arab State, which certainly gives 
such a state — if one exists in the future — a significant claim to title. 
A further examination of the Palestine partition resolution indicates 
that the territory allocated to Israel — much less than the present 
claims or the cease-fire lines which existed prior to June 5, 1967 — was 


only allocated on condition that certain duties imposed upon each state 
to be established in Palestine were carried out. 

Among these legal obligations, section 10(d) of part IB is particu- 
larly important and provides that each of the states to be set up in 
Palestine shall have a constitution which includes provisions: 

Guaranteeing to all i)ersons equal and nondiscriminatory rights in civil, 
political, economic, and religious matters and the enjoyment of human rights and 
fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion, language, speech and 
publication, education, assembly, and association. 

In most civilized legal systems it is recognized that legal rights may 
only be exercised conditioned upon compliance with legal duties. The 
refusal of the State of Israel to comply with the nondiscriminatory 
requirements of the Palestine partition resolution — its main claim to 
title — puts in serious jeopardy its claim to legal title to the limited 
territory allocated to it by the resolution. 

It has been mentioned that the partition resolution allocated the 
West Bank and the Gaza Strip, along with other territory, to the 
Palestine Arab State. It should be added that article 22(4) of the 
League of Nations Covenant, certainly the most significant multi- 
lateral treaty until the advent of the United Nations Charter, recog- 
nized provisionally the independence of all of Palestine. Although a 
complete analysis is beyond the scope of the present inquiry, there ap- 
pears to be persuasive pre-existing legal authority for the territory 
comprising a State of Palestine, or, I emphasize, a nondiscriminatory 
basis, including the religious nondiscrimination required Palestine 
by the partition resolution. 

One must conclude that Dr. Blum is unaware of the consequences of 
an inquiry concerning title to territory. The inadequacy of his anal- 
ysis is further emphasized by his statement that, in addition to the 
de facto existence of a state, recognition is the basis for the title of a 
state and its lawfulness. If so, the State of Israel is in serious trouble 
under his analysis because at the present time more states recognize 
the Palestine Liberation Organization than recognize the State of 

The thesis developed by Dr. Blum and acted upon by Mr. Begin is 
defective in law, although no one can doubt its effectiveness, thus 
far, as a matter of power politics. As a substantive matter it does not 
merit serious consideration but, because it has been acted upon by the 
Government of Israel, it will now be considered. 

First, Dr. Blum uses an obscure method of treaty interpretation 
which is not known in international law or, indeed, in any civilized 
legal system. It places little or no reliance upon either the text of the 
Convention or its negotiating history, which are the accepted methods 
of ascertaining meaning including the basic purpose of the 

Second, it assumes without supporting evidence that the word "ter- 
ritory" in article 2 of the Civilians Convention must be narrowly con- 
strued as only including territory over which the displaced govern- 
ment had de jure title or complete fomial sovereignty. 

Even if the claim that Jordan annexed the West Bank unlaw- 
fully should be accepted for purposes of legal argument, this does not 
mean that this territory is not "the territory of a high contracting 


party" within the meaning of article 2. It is well established that the 
word "territory" includes, in addition to de Jure title, a mere de facto 
title to the territory. Otherwise, civilians in disputed territory would 
be denied the protection of law on the basis of a trivial, and indeed, 
a nonexistent technicality. 

Third, the idea that in order to apply the law of belligerent oc- 
cupation it is necessary for the belligerent to recognize the displaced 
government's title to the territory finds no support in either the text 
of the Convention or its negotiating history. In addition, it is contrary 
to the well-established customary law based upon state practice. For 
example, during the American Civil War, the United States treated 
territory wliich it claimed as sovereign but wliich the Confederate 
States had held as the de facto possessor as being subject to the law 
of belligerent occupation up until the conclusion of the Civil War. 
This was the widely accepted customary international law, with the 
exception of the Nazi and Japanese militarist practices of World 
AVar II, and there is nothing in the Geneva Civilians Convention 
which changes it. 

Fourth, the legal obstacle of the discredited "just war" concept 
which Dr. Blum relies upon must be raised. Dr. Blum and the Gov- 
ernment of Israel claim the right to unilaterally categorize the oppo- 
nent's title to land as being the result of aggression with the effect that 
civilians do not receive the protection of the international humanitar- 
ian law. If the humanitarian law were to be changed so that its 
application was made contingent upon recognition by the belligerent 
occupant of the justness of the war aims of its opponent, it is per- 
fectly clear that the humanitarian law would be rarely, if ever, applied. 

The fifth legal block to the acceptance of Dr. Blum's thesis is that 
it frustrates the entire humanitarian purpose of the Civilians Con- 
vention. Dr. Blum interprets the Convention as a treaty which is 
desired to protect governmental rights and particularly the right 
to dispute the de jure title to territory. In contrast, the governments 
represented at the Geneva Diplomatic Conference of 1949, including 
the Government of Israel, stated in the preamble to the Civilians 
Convention that they met "for the purpose of establishing a Conven- 
tion for the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War." To 
attempt to avoid humanitarian protections for civilians by alleging 
the existence of nonspecified governmental rights is to turn the entire 
Convention upside down. Since the Convention was written by gov- 
ernments, it is clear that the governmental rights which Dr. Blum 
alleges to exist would have been specified in the Convention if the 
governments at Geneva had accepted their legal validity. 

I hope, Mr. Chairman, that I have made it quite clear that I am 
in full and complete agreement with Dr. Blum with only two excep- 
tions. One exception, sir, relates to the facts and the other to the law. 

Senator Abourezk. Other than that, you agree with him ? 

Mr. Mallison. Yes, sir, only those two exceptions. 

The United Nations, both through the General Assembly and the 
Security Council, has taken the position that the Geneva Civilians 
Convention must be applied in the territories occupied by Israel since 
June 1967. It is particularly important that the U.S. Government has 


consistently taken this position. For example, Ambassador Charles 
Yost stated in the United Nations Security Council on July 1, 1969 
that the Government of Israel was required by law to apply the 
Geneva Civilians Convention and added that the U.S. Government 
has "so informed the Government of Israel on numerous occasions 
since July 1967." I note here 61 Department State Bulletin. 76, 
July 28, 1969. 

On November 11, 1976, while the Ford administration was still in 
office and after consultation with the recently elected Carter admin- 
istration, the United States participated in a Security Council con- 
sensus statement concerning the law applicable in the occupied terri- 
tories. In this unanimous action, the Security Council stated : 

Its reaflSrmation that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protec- 
tion of Civilian Persons in Time of War is applicable to the Arab territories 
occupied by Israel since 1967. 

Therefore, the occupying power is called upon once again to comply strictly 
with the provisions of that Convention and to refrain from any measure that 
violates them. In this regard the measures taken by Israel in the occupied 
Arab territories that alter their demographic composition or geographical nature 
and particularly the establishment of settlements are accordingly strongly de- 
plored. Such measures which have no legal validity and cannot prejudice the 
outcome of the search for the establishment of peace constitute an obstacle to 
peace. It considers once more that all legislative and administrative measures 
and actions taken by Israel, including expropriation of land and properties 
thereon and the trani^fer of populations which tend to change the legal status of 
Jerusalem, are invalid and cannot change that status, and urgently calls upon 
Israel once more to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forth- 
with from taking any further action which tends to change the status of 

I think the language, Mr. Chairman, in the Security Council resolu- 
tion concerning altering the "demographic composition" of the terri- 
tories is very important. As we all remember, the U.S. executive 
branch strongly objected to the General Assembly resolution char- 
acterizing Zionism as a form of racism. The U.S. Government, by using 
different words, appears now, at least since November 1976, to agree 
with the General Assembly characterization of Zionism by using the 
words "demographic composition" rather than "racism." Of course, 
we have the authority of William Shakespeare for the proposition, 
Mr. Chairman, that "a rose by any other name is just as sweet." 

By this action, the members of the U.N. Security Council were simply 
carrying out their obligations under the common article 1 which 
appears in each of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 for the protec- 
tion of war victims. This article provides in full : "The high contract- 
ing parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present 
Convention in all circumstances." The obligation of the government 
and its officers and nationals to adhere to its international law agree- 
ments is commonplace. The words "and to ensure respect" were added 
at Geneva with the purpose of requiring state parties to the Conven- 
tion to compel compliance by any state party which might be in viola- 
tion of the Convention. 

This obligation, which is particularly applicable to the United 
States and the otlier great powers, is a continuing one. Among the next 
steps which are available to the U.N. Security Council are the applica- 
tion of mandatory economic and military sanctions to the State of 
Israel as an international law breaker. 

. 53 


Since other witnesses are stating the facts concerning Government 
of Israel practices in the occupied territories, the present analysis is 
limited to a brief consideration of some of the main articles of the 
Civilians Convention which have been violated, along with a few 
explanations based upon the negotiating history. 

It is a long convention and I am only going to use a very few exam- 
ples specifically relevant to the subcommittee's interest. 

Article 4 defines civilian protected persons in comprehensive word- 
ing as "those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever 
find themeslves, in a case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a 
party to the conflict or occupying power of which they are not nation- 
als." This avoids leaving out any possible civilians. 

Article 27 of this Convention provides : 

Without prejudice to the provisions relating to their state of health, age, and 
sex, all protected persons shall be treated with the same consideration by the 
party to the conflict in whose power they are, without any adverse distinction 
based, in particular, on race, religion, or political opinion. 

The purpose of this is to prevent the discrimination of the type that 
Dr. Shahak told us about earlier this morning. 
Article 33 states that : 

No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally 
committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of 
terrorism are prohibited. 

Pillage is prohibited. 

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited. 

The prohibitions of collective penalties and reprisals are substantive 
and are violated by the destruction of houses and villages even if 
termed "neighborhood punishment." It is highly significant that the 
Civilians Convention flatly prohibits governmental terrorism directed 
at civilians. Terrorism, whether conducted by government or non- 
governmental entities, causes the most severe deprivation of human 
rights including the right of life itself. 

Article 49 of the Civilians Convention, as indicated by its negotiating 
history, was adopted in order to prevent a repetition of certain prac- 
tices particularly associated with the Nazis. Article 49(1) provides: 

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected per- 
sons from occupied territory to the territory of the occupying power or to that of 
any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive. 

There are two exceptions to the language I have just read about 
deportations. Other provisions of article 49 allow "evacuation" of civil- 
ians under stringent safeguards if their security requires it or if it is 
made necessary by "imperative military reasons." These two situations 
are the only exceptions. 

Article 49(6) provides: 

The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian 
population into the territory it occupies. 

There are no qualifications or exceptions to this provision. As indi- 
cated by the negotiating history, one central purpose is to prevent 
creeping annexation by the "creation of facts" in occupied territory, 


thereby prohibiting the repetition of well-known Nazi practices. This 
pro\nsion prohibits the Israeli settlements in any of the occupied ter- 
ritories including the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights, and the 

Senator Abourezk. May I interrupt there? 

Professor Blum's position was that so long as they did not displace 
anybody, they were legal under the Convention. Do you disagree with 

Mr. Mallison. I disagree with that definitely. I understood him 
to say, Mr, Chairman, that also was Mrs. Rita Hauser's position. T 
would like to take the opportunity to go on record as disagreeing with 
her also. Apparently, according to Mrs. Hauser, unless the Govern- 
ment of Israel has done exactly and precisely the same thing that the 
Nazis have done ; that is, transferring its own civilians into the occu- 
pied territory to displace the existing indigenous population and then 
march that indigenous population off to concentration camps, where 
they all will be murdered, there is no violation of article 49(6). 

The matter over-emphasized by Mrs. Hauser was one, but only one 
of the purposes of article 49(6). The comprehensive language of 
article 49(6) allows no exceptions regardless of the purpose of the 
occupying power in transferring its own population into settlements 
in occupied territory. There is no legal basis whatsoever upon which 
the settlements can be justified. 


The international humanitarian law concerning belligerent occu- 
pation also applies to natural resources. As an example, a brief sum- 
mary of its application to oil resources is included here. Articles 23 (g) , 
46, 52, 53, and 55 of the Hague Eegulations which are part of the 
Hague Convention IV of 1907 (1910) 36 Stat. 2277, T.S. No. 539— 
specify the limitations on the occupying power's rights over property 
in occupied territory. These provisions not only appear in a treaty 
of the United States but are now widely regarded as being a part of 
binding customary international law, including binding those States 
that were not members of the world community in 1907. They were so 
treated by the Nuremburg tribunals following the Second World War.- 

The Hague Regulations enunciate two basic legal principles con- 
cerning the protection of property in occupied territory. 

These principles are that private property may not be, taken without 
compensation and that property interests may not be exploited to 
enrich the occupying state, as by using oil from the occupied territory 
to fulfill the needs of the occupant's home economy. As interpreted by 
various municipal and international courts, the Hague Regulations 
do not permit Israel to take oil from producing wells without compen- 
sation and then exploit the oil commercially including using it for its 
own domestic purposes. This prohibited action is precisely what the 
Government of Israel has done with oil from the Sinai. At the. most, the 
law of the Hague Regulations only permits that crude oil taken in the 
occupied territory be used for the militai-y purposes of the occupant 
within the occupied territory. It is also clear under existing law that 


Israel has no right to prospect for oil and to establish oil wells any place 
in the occupied territories. The belligerent occupant may only act as 
a "usufructary" in relation to natural resources including oil, and this 
requires it to conserve the oil and make a full accounting for it to the 
lawful governmental and private owners of the oil resources as soon 
as the belligerent occupation is terminated. 

A definitive study on this subject which concludes that the State of 
Israel has violated the applicable international law is: Edward R. 
Cummings, "Oil Resources in Occupied Arab Territories Under the 
Law of Belligerent Occupation," 9 Journal of International Law and 
Economics of George Washington University 533 ( 1974) . 


I urge this subcommittee, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the 
Senate to take all necessary steps to maintain the leadership of the 
U.S. Government in humanVights law concerning international armed 
conflicts and belligerent occupations. 

The United States should more adequately honor its treaty obliga- 
tion "to insure respect for" the Civilians Convention in all circuni- 
stances. The Civilians Convention must be enforced fully and without 
discrimination in order to make its protection of human rights 

A most eflFective sanction, within the constitutional authority of the 
Senate and the Congress, would be to withhold military and economic 
assistance from any government which is in flagrant and persistent 
violation of the Geneva Civilians Convention for the protection of 
war victims. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Abourezk. Thank you very much. Professor Mallison, for 
a very good exposition of the existing international law on this 

Your statement has been exceedingly thorough and does not leave 
me very many questions to ask. You have responded virtually in full to 
the pronouncements by the previous witness. Professor Blum. 

Other than the questions that I asked during the course of your testi- 
mony, I have no questions unless you have something else that you 
would like to say. 

Mr. Mallison. Mr. Chairman, Professor Blum has referred to ag- 
gression in his presentation. I would like to point out that the new Is- 
raeli prime minister, Mr. Begin, introduced massive terror into the 
Palestine- Israel conflict in the 1940's. Along with his fellow Euro- 
peans in the Irgun, he was responsible for a continuous series of terror- 
ists attacks, many of which are described with pride by Mr. Begin 
in his book entitled "The Revolt : Story of the Irgim." Since 1948, Mr. 
Begin has advised the Government of Israel on many of its acts of 
governmental terror against Palestinians. This is the same Mr. Begin 
who has recently been a welcome visitor of the U.S. Government. 

While Mr. Begin was in the United States, a distinguished Pales- 
tinian lawyer and scholar, Mr. Sabri Jiryis, who advocates peaceful 
solutions to the Middle East conflict, was denied a visa to come to this 


country. I cannot help wondering, Mr. ChaiiTnan, if our Government 
is really aware that it is sending a message of encouragement to all 
terrorists in the world who aspire to emulate Mr. Begin, while dis- 
couraging moderates, whether Palestinians of Israelis, who are com- 
mitted to peaceful methods. 

Senator Abourezk. With that, I would like to once again express my 
thanks for a scholarly and thorough study of this question and for 
your presentation to the committee. 

Without objection, the two attachments to your written statement 
will be included in the record at this point. 

[The attachments follow :] 





npa o'nim 'i-A 

On SuBdar. the third tnt«rm«dUt« day ot Pea«ah (April 18). partldpi^la 
win Mt out on U)« Er«U Tianel March. We will atart from the atapng 
area at Belt El between 8 and 10 am 

A/ier 10 a-m., walken will no! T>e aHowed to follow the inareh route, and 
the ata^lnf ara« will t>e cloaed 


Aa explanatory aheet lor marchen wUl be available at the Belt El staring 

area It will give detalla of the route and the sites ot Interest In the area. 

FID tn the coupon attached to the explanatory sheet, and hand II In at 

one of the overnlcbl caaipe In exchanKv. you wtll receive a participant's 


Follow our ada In the pre** for details ot transportation. 

BnnK all tlie neoeaaary equipment — Including a happy mood. 

n'!BJ — rhs — -hv 

N«c««nuT ««alpBMat; Two full bottles ot water: beed covering: atrwiK. 
comtorteble walking ahoea; sleeping bag: torcb; food for two dars. toilet 

March Haodquorten 

Gush Emunim 




Ad ifi Jerusaletn Post. April 14, 1976 


The following document is translated from the Jerusalem 
Arabic daily Al-Quds of June 5, 1977. Additional details have 
been added-in brackets and italics— based on research done by 
Ann Lesch, who we kindly thank for her permission to print 
this previously unpublished research. Information added by 
ME RIP is in brackets designated by "Eds. "Abdullah Elsuyadi 
translated the Al-Quds article for MERIP. 

The struggle for possession of land has been a primary aspect 
of the Palestinian problem for the Zionist movement since its 
inception. In the first Zionist conference held in 1897, Profes- 
sor [Hermann— Eds.) Zvi Schapira suggested the creation of a 
special national fund for the possession of land in Palestine.* 

•The Jewish National Fund {Keren Koyemet L'Yisntet) was actually 
established in 1901 for the "reclamation" of land In Palestine. In the 
oast two decades the JNF's activities hate focussed on propaganda, 
fundralslng and facilitating "the establishment of frontier settlements 
that posed special agricultural and security problems." (Encyclopedia 
of Zionism and Ivael) 

reprinted from MERIP HBO 


This suggestion emphasized the prohibition on selling any piece 
of land belonging to this fund to individuals, even Jewi. Seven 
years after the convening of the first Zionist conference in 
1904, the Zionist philosopher Ussishkin put the actual strategy 
of possessing the land as follows: In order to establish sectarian- 
independent life for Jews or, for clarity of expression, a Jewish 
state on the land of Israel, It is imperative that all the land of 
Israel, or at least the majority of it, should be in the possession 
of the Jewish people. Without the right to possess the land it 
cannot be "the land of Israel" irrespective of the proportion of 
the Jewish population in It. 

Ussishkin based his strategy for possessing the land on 
three points: 

1 . Seizure of (and by war 

2. Forcible purchases through the ruling authority 

3. Voluntary purchases from its owners. 

Upon the consequences of the June war of 1967, the mili- 
tary authority in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula 
and the Golan Heights formed the so-called Israel Land Au- 
thority IlLA— Eds.] to supervise all matters connected with 
land problems and construction in these territories. Offices 
were opened for I LA in the major cities in the occupied terri- 
tories and employees of I LA were appointed to coordinate 
with the military authority. 

The Israel Land Authority began its work with survey 
operations in the occupied territories. These surveys had mul- 
tiple objectives: ascertaining the area of state-owned territory, 
the area which the Jordanian Army controlled, and the area of 
land owned by absentees. The I LA drew up a statistical report 
about its work for the year 1968-69. It was obvious from this 
report that among the tasks delegated to the I LA were prepa- 
rations for Jewish colonial settlement in the occupied Arab 


The following is an abstract of the I LA yearly reports in the 

West Bank, Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula. 

Annual Report 1970-71 : West Bank-earmarking 42.650 

dunums for the purpose of colonial settlement. 

Annual Report 1971-72: West Bank— earmarking 8,850 dunums 

for the purpose of colonial settlement. The Gaza Strip and 

northern Sinai-24,000 dunums for colonial settlement. 

Annual Report 1972-73: Gaza Strip and northern Sinai— 3,000 

dunums for the improvement of three Jewish settlements. 

Annual Report 1973-74: West Bank— earmarking 8,807 dunums 

for colonial settlement. 

Annual Report 1974-75: West Bank-earmarking 10,722 

dunums for colonial settlement. Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula 

—expropriation of 13,400 dunums in the environs of Rafah for 

colonial settlement. 

Annual Report 1975-76: West Bank— earmarking 1,653 dunums 

for colonial settlement. Gaza Strip and Sinai peninsula— 10,820 

dunums (for colonial settlement— Eds.) 


The Golan Heights is approximately 1,400 square kilometers, 
or 1 ,400.000 dunums; if the occupied areas in Mount Hermon 
and Ghoar Al-Hameh are included the total area is 1 ,190 square 



1 N»ve Atlv 

3 Har Odem 

4 E( Rom 

5 M«rom Golan 

6 Ein Zlvan 

7 Katzrin (Industrtal a 
B Keshet 

9 Anl'am 

10 Yonatan 

12 Gamla 

13 Ramot 

14 Merkaz HIsfIn 

15 Ramat Magshlmln 

16 Avn< Eltan 

17 Nov 

18 Geshur 

19 Ell Al 

20 GIvat Yo'av 

21 U«rkaz Bnel Yehuda 

22 Ne'ot Golan -- 

24 Kfar Haruv f 

25 Mevo Hamma \ 

Source: Ann Lescfi 

International borders — 
Armistice Lines (1949)- 

Bufferzone (after Israel-Syria S 
Disengagement Agreement, ''^ 

May 1974). 


kilometers. Geographically the Golan Heights can be divided 
into three sectors: north abutting Mount Hermon, central, and 
southern Heights overlooking Lake Tit)erias [Sea of Galilee 

There are 10,000 Arab peasants living in the Golan Heights 
in four villages: Majdal-Shams, Baakata, Massadah and Ain 
Keena. Most of the lOjOOO are Druze: before the Israeli occu- 
pation about 130 poo Syrians lived in Golan. 

The number of settlements existing and planned for in the 
near future is 24: six in the north, four in the central sector, 
and 14 in the southern part of the Golan Heights. The large 
concentration of settlements in the south is due to the fertility 
of the land and the availability of water. Up to 1974 Israel 
exploited 50,000 dunums for agricultural settlement and it 
plans to exploit an additional 140,000 dunums for agricultural 
objectives and 400,000 dunums as natural grazing area for the 
settlers' flocks. There are 3.500 Jewish settlers in the Golan 
Heights living in 1,200 housing units secured against light 
weapons. The significance of these settlements is due to the 
strategic position of the Heights. This has been repeatedly 
proven during the October 1973 war when Israel let the Egyp- 
tians advance in Sinai but did not tolerate the penetration of 
the Syrian forces in the Golan Heights because it threatens 
major Israeli cities. 

The following is an abstract of the settlements which were 
established in the Golan Heights. 

1 . El-Ad: erected in 1968 in southern Golan on the site of 
the Arab village of el-AI, and originally called by that name. 
In 1973 this settlement was expanded and its name changed to 
El-Ad. The area of this settlement is 4,500 dunums. 

2. El-Rom: erected in 1971 on the Kuneitra-Massadah 
road, on the site of the Arab village of Ain Hawar, in the north- 
ern sector. The area of cultivated land is 4,600 dunums, and 
recently a small fishery reservoir was established on another 
400 dunums. This [kibbutz*! isaffiliated with the Labor Party 

3. Afik: this was the first settlement established in the 
Golan Heights after the June 1967 war, under the name of 
Nahal Golan, on the site of the Arab village of Fiek. In Janu- 
ary 1968 it was enlarged and renamed Afik. The area of the 
settlement is 4,500 dunums, and it is affiliated with the Labor 

4. Ein Zivan: established on the site of the Arab village of 
Ain Za'yion on the road to Kuneitra. The total land area is 
5,000 dunums. This kibbutz cultivates fruit orchards 

5. Ani'am: established in 1973, it is an industrial settle- 
ment for Jews from the US. It is located close to the Arab vil- 
lage of Al-Rumanah. 

6. Keshet: this settlement was relocated after the 1974 
disengagement agreement with Syria and is now a military 
camp on the Golan Heights. The settlers perform agricultural 
work and administrative tasks for the military. 

7. Ramot: founded in 1969 and enlarged in 1974, this 
settlement is near the Arab village of Kufr A'Kab. Its area is 
4,000 dunums. 

8. Ramat Magshimin: erected in 1968 and expanded in 
1972, the area of this settlement is 4,500 dunums. It lis a 

*A kibbutz Is a collectively owned and run, primerlly agricultural, civil- 
ian settlement. 

'HaPoel haMizrohi was founded between the two world wars as a reli- 
gious labor movement. In 19S6 It merged wltti Mizfani. a religious Zion- 
ist movement, to form tne conservative National Religious party, a 
vociferous proponent of Jewish settlement throughout "Eretz Israet" 
within the present Israeli government coalition. 

religious kibbutz) belonging to the haPoel haMizrahi move- 

9. Snir: founded near Tel Al-Hamrah after it was cleared 
of mines in 1967, this settlement is 2,000 dunums of grazing 
area for the settlers' animals and an additional 2,000 dunums 
for the settlement itself. 

10. Givat Yo'av: established in 1968 in the houses of the 
Arab village of Sa'kufia in the southern part of the Golan 
Heights. This settlement was enlarged in 1972 and the present 
area is 4,500 dunums. 

11. Nahal* Geshur: founded in 1968 and relocated to its 
present site after the 1 974 disengagement agreement with Syria. 

12. Kafr Genat: established in 1971 near the Arab village 
of Sa'kufia, east of Lake Tiberias, this settlement belongs to 
the haPoel haMizrahi movement. 

13. Kfar Haruv: erected on the site of a Syrian military 
camp, overlooking Lake Tiberias This settlement was enlarged 
in 1974 and has an area of 2,800 dunums. 

14. Mevo Hanna: established in 1968 on the site of the 
Arab village of Hamah near a Syrian position. This settlement 
has an area of 4,500 dunums. 

15. Merom Golan: created in 1967 on the site of a Syrian 
military camp south of Kuneitra, and enlarged in 1972. This 
settlement has an area of 4,500 dunums and belongs to the 
haKibbutz haM'uhad movement.* The approximately 350 kib- 
butz members (as of spring 19751 raise potatoes, apples, tulips 
and cattle. 

16. Bnei Yehuda Center: this settlement provides services 
to the settlements in the southern Golan Heights. It was founded 
in 1972 and has industries for the Air Force. 

17. Ne'ot Golan: founded on the site of the Arab village of 
Fik in 1968, this settlement has an area of 4,500 dunums and 
belongs to the Independent Liberal Party. 

18. Nov: established on the site of the Arab village of 
Maz'Ra'at Noob in 1973, this settlement has an area of 4,000 

19. Neve Ativ: founded on the site of the Arab village of 
Jofta Az-Ziet in 1968 under the name of Ramat Shalom, this 
settlement was expanded in 1971 and belongs to the Indepen- 
dent Liberal Party. It includes a ski resort on the top of Mount 
Hermon. It was abandoned during the October 1973 war, but 
has expanded quickly since the summer of 1974, including a 
ski-station, snow equipment and a sports club. Development 
funds come from the World Zionist Organization, the Israeli 
Tourism Ministry and the Government Tourist Company; 70% 
of the moshav's * income comes from tourism and skiing. 

20. Har Odem: founded in 1975 near the Druze village of 
Bak'Ata, this settlement was taken over by the Independent 
Liberal Party in 1976. Some of the settler? work in the elec- 
tronics industry and others in tourist -related jobs. 

21. Yonatan: established in 1975 near the Arab village of 

•A nahal is a oara-mllitarv settlement, run by the Israel Defense Forces 
to provide agricultural as well as military training for soldiers. 

'HaKibbutz haM'uhad or United Kibbutz movement founded Ahdul 
'Avoda (United Zionist Labor) party In 1944. which merged with 
HaShomer HaTza'ir to form the Mapam (Labor) party In 1948.HoKi&- 
butz haAfuhad'i original purpose was to "utilize . . . collective . . . 
settlement for large-scale absorption of workers"; It Is still an Influential 
proponent of settlements within the Labor Party. lEncyclopedia of 
Zionism and itraet) 

*A moshav Is a cooperative agricultural settlement based on private 
ownership of land leased by the JNF, and iolnt marketing and owner- 
ship of large machinery. 


Kukah. in the southern sector of the Golan. 
122. Messing from original text-Eds.l 

23. Katzrin. a settlement center in the central region of the 
Bcnat Yakojb bridge-Kuneitra road. It is expected that this 
settlement will accommodate 20,000 Israelis and will have an 
industrial area. 

24. Sha'al; a civilian settlement founded in 1976 belonging 
to the Herut Party.' Vegetable fields and a factory are being 


From 1967 to the present Israel has been establishing senle- 
ments along three lines in the West Bank and the Jordan valley. 
The first line is on the Jordan valley's eastern border (along 
the Jordan River] to the Dead Sea. The objective of this line is 
the creation of civilian settlements to complement the military 
positions and settlements which are scattered on that front 
The second line is located on the eastern plains of the Nablus 
mountain range. The third line is located on the borders of the 
West Bank and Israel. This line separates the Arab villages in 
the northern West Bank from the Arab villages in the Triangle 
region (of 1948 Israel-Eds.l . By 1976, 15 agricultural settle- 
ments had been created and linked by highways in the Jordan 

Israel ranks the Judaization of Jerusalem at the top of its settle- 

■The party of Prime Minister Begin. 

ment priorities. Israel is in a race with time: it knows that the 
Arab character of Jerusalem is a key factor in the course of a 
total settlement [of the Middle East situation-Eds.) . There 
fore, Israel is attempting to create facts in Jerusalem. Israel 
legislated an assortment of laws and regulations, such as the 
law to increase the Jewish population of Jerusalem, in addition 
to establishing residential areas surrounding the city. This was 
done to close off Arab access to Jewish neighborhoods. Israel 
also created nearby settlements in the West Bank to be the 
backbone for Jewish residential areas which surround Jerusalem. 
For example, the settlement of Kafr Etzion is the backbone 
for the residential neighborhood south of Jerusalem near Beth- 
lehem and Beit Jala, the residential neighborhood of Talpiot, 
and Har Gila settlement near Beit Jala, as well as housing units 
planned for the Mount Ar-Ras (Jebel Ar-Ras) region. 

The area of Al-Khan Al-Ahmer {Maale haAdumim) on the 
Jerusalem-Jericho road, is considered the backbone for the 
established residential neighborhoods east of Jerusalem north 
of Jebel Al-Tur. This settlement is called Har HaTzofim [Mount 
Scopus— Eds.] and is linked to the Hebrew University and 
Hadassah Hospital. 

Neve Yaacov and Nebi Samuel [Ramot settlement] and 
the designated settlement on the site of the Arab village of 
Jeba', northeast of Jerusalem, are considered the backbone tor 
the newly-built residential areas, French Hill and Ramat 
Eshkol, north of Jerusalem. Israel is also planning to exploit 
1 .100 dunums from the village of A'nata for the establishment 
of an industrial complex capable of accommodating factories 
for both parts of Jerusalem. 







Top left: sign in Hebron 

Top right: fortress-like buildings in Kiryat Arba 
Botton left: Kiryat Arba settlers in 1970 
Bottom right: Kiryat Arba dominates expropriated 
Palestinian land. 



1. Kafr Etzion; established in [Septemberl 1967 on the 
remnants of a village eliminated on May 13, 1948. It is one of 
four religious settlements on the Jerusalem- Hebron road, has 
an area of 1 ,000 dunums and belongs to the haPoel haMizrahi 
movement. This was the first settlement on the i/Uest Bank; 
from 1948 to 1967 it was the site of a Jordan army camp. Its 
economic base is a factory and turkey run. In spring 1975 the 
population was 200. 

2. Alon Shvot: established in 1970 in the area of Kafr 
Etzion near Kharbat Zakaria. It has an area of 500 dunums 
and another 500 dunums are being prepared for 200 housing 
units. Like Kafr Etzion it is a religious kibbutz; in the spring of 
1976 its population was approximately 300. 

3. Elazar: created in (October) 1975 in the Kafr Etzion 
region' for the establishment of light industries. It is a religious 
moshav with a chemical laboratory and a projected toy factory. 
In spring 1976 there were 90 residents; its land includes 350 
dunums expropriated in 1973 from the Arab village of Hadar. 

—. 4. Rosh Tzurim: the fourth settlement in the area of Kafr 

) Etzion, founded in [July) 1969. It has an area of 800 dunums. 
It is a religious kibbutz of about 150 residents, and its eco- 
nomic base is a turkey run. 

5. Kiryat Arba: founded [illegallyl in (April) 1968 by 
four Jewish families in two buildings near the building of the 
military governor for the Hebron area. This settlement has an 
area of 3,000 dunums and a population of 1,400 in 200 hous 

ing units. Its economy depends on industry and tourism. It 
was legalized in 1970. 

6. Elon Moreh (Kaddum): Israelis (of the Gush Emunim 
movement— Eds.] tried several times to settle in a vacated train 
station near Sabastia, but the government prevented them. On 
May 9, 1976 a ministerial ruling permitted them to relocate at 
an army camp near the Arab village of Kafr Kaddum where a 
settlement is being established especially for them. [This settle- 
ment was legalized by Prime Minister Begin on July 26, 

7. Argaman; established in [November] 1968 in the 
northern region of the Jordan valley near the Arab village of 
Marj e-Naj'a. It became a civilian [moshav] in [May] 1971, 
with an area of 4,500 dunums, linked to the Herut party. Its 
population of approximately 90 grows fruit and vegetables and 
runs a restaurant. 

8. Baka'ot; founded in [July] 1972 in the Jordan valley. 
It belongs to the Agricultural Union [Ihud Haklai"] and has 
an area of 1,800 dunums with an additional 300 dunums for 
the cultivation of citrus fruits (and vegetables] . This moshav 
also raises poultry. 

9. Gilgal: founded in (January] 1970 [as a nahal] near 
the village of al-Awja, and changed to a civilian settlement in 

■/hud Haklai or Agricultural Union Is a "nonpollt icdl orqjnlzation of 
farmers working their own family farms, (which] assists Its members fn 
establtshtng and consolidating their farmsteads and helps organize eco- 
nomic and social life In middle-class agricultural settlements." (Encycto- 
pedia of Zionism and Israel) 

20-488 O - 78 


[Mavl 1973 with a land area of 1,400 dunums. They grow 
vegetables and citrus fruits. 

10. Gitit: established in [August] 1972 (as a nahal] on the 
plains of the eastern Nablus mountain range. In [December] 
1975 it was enlarged and became a civilian settlement with an 
area of 1 ,500 dunums. This moshav belongs to the Herat par 
ty; its economic base is the cultivation of vegetables and field 
crops. Its land was expropriated from the Arab village of 
Akraba from which 5,000 dunums was closed off and sprayed 
with defoliants in early 1972. 

11. Har Gila: founded in 1968 in an army camp near the 
Arab village of Beit Jala. It was later expanded and more build 
ings added; it belongs to the Nature Conservation organization. 
The Israeli government is now planning to again expand this 
settlement to accommodate 200 families, making it a link 
between Jerusalem, Kafr Etzion and the Bethlehem-Beit Jala 
highway junction. 

12. Hamra: created in [May] 1971, 25 kilometers east of 
Nablus on the Damiya bridge road. Its area is 3,500 dunums. 
This moshav has about 90 residents who raise vegetables, citrus, 
flowers, poultry and have a metal workshop; and are members 
of Ihud Haklai. Its land was taken from the Arab village of Bab 

13. Mevo Horon: founded near the Arab village of Beit 
Nuba in 1969 and expanded in 1974. This settlement is agri 
cultural, particularly the cultivation of olives, with an area of 
2,700 dunums. It is a religious moshav of about 50 residents. 

14. Mivshom: presently under construction in the Jordan 
valley; the settlers are temporarily housed in Nahal Kaliah camp. 

15. Mehola: established in the Jordan valley [as a nahal] 
in (February) 1968, and expanded and converted to a civilian 
settlement in [November) 1969. It has an area of 3,000 
dunums and is linked to the haPoel haMizrahi movement. The 
90 or so settlers raise field crops, ^apefruit, turkeys and have 
a metal factory. Its land was taken from the Arab villages of 
Bardala and Tel elBeida, both of whose water supply is severe- 
ly depleted by Mehola 's wells. 

16. Maale haAdumim: founded in 1975 near the Arab vil- 
lage of al-Khan al-Ahmar, 15 kilometers east of Jerusalem. A 
military-industrial base was established on the 400 dunum 
settlement The original settfers (numbering about 60) were 
from the Gush Emunim movement, but plans for ^ is industrial 
area include housing for 2,500 Jewish workers. In 1972 the 
Israel Defense Force closed off 70,000 dunums of land in this 
area and more expropriations followed in mid-1975 from the 
land of the Arab villages of Abu Dis. Azariya and Issawiya. 

17. Maale Ephraim: presently under construction [as a 
regional center] in the Jordan valley. The settlement was 
originally founded in July 1972 by Phatza'el settlers who stayed 
until mid- 1957. A temporary maintenance group came in 1976 
to continue construction. 

18. Mitzpe Shalem: founded in [December] 1970, five 
kilometers from the Dead Sea, with an area of 200 dunums. 
This nahal cultivates date palms and vegetables and runs a 

19. Massuah: established [as a nahal) several kilometers off 
the highway junction of Damiah bridge-NabtusAI Jiftlik in the 
Jordan valley. It was expanded and converted into a civilian 
[kibbutz) in [May) 1974;itsarea is4,000dunums with another 
600 dunums added recently. Its 80 settlers, affiliated with the 
independent Liberal party, raise vegetables and fish. 

20. Mekhora: established in 1972 on the eastern plains of 
the Nablus mountain range on an area of 1,500 dunums. In 
July 1976 this nahal was converted to a civilian moshav, part 
of Ihud Haklai. which raises vegetables and fruit. Its land was 
expropriated from the Arab villages of Bab e-Nakb, Beit Da/an 
and Beit Funk. 

21. Na'aran: founded in [December] 1970, 10 kilometers 
north of Ariahah, on an area of 100 dunums. This nahal was 
converted to a civilian kibbutz in October 1976 and it now 
goes by the name of Yitav. It grows vegetables and field crops; 
its land was expropriated from the Arab villages of A wja Fawka 
and Aw/a Tahta. 

22. Netiv Hagdud: presently under construction in the 
Jordan valley. 

23. Ofra: founded [illegally] in [May] 1975 in [a former 
Jordanian] army camp northeast of Ain Yabrud on 250 
dunums [of this village's land] . This settlement belongs to the 
Gush Emunim movement [and had about 100 people in the 
spring of 1976] . [tt was legalized by Prime Minister Begin on 
July 26. 1977-Eds.] 

24. Phatza'el: established in the Jordan valley in [Decern 
ber] 1970 and expanded in 1975. Its area is 3,000 dunums 
and belongs to the settlements movement. The members of 
this moshav, who lived at Maale Ephraim until April 1975. 
grow winter vegetables for export. There are about 40 families 
in residence. 

25. Kalia (Almog): created in [February] 1968 [asanahal] 
and enlarged and converted into a civilian [kibbutz] in 1974, 
located on the road northwest of the Dead Sea. The settlers 
raise ..jetables, trees, turkeys, vineyards, and fish. 

26. Efrat: the ILA is preparing a study for the establish- 
ment of the Efrat Settlement Center in the area of Bethlehem. 



Despite the fact that it is an uninhabited desert and has obvious 
need for a natural (water— Eds.) source, Israel appears deter 
mined to seize one-third of the Sinai's 24 thousand square 
miles. Israel's desire to retain this part of the Sinai is both 
strategic and economic, as petroleum is found near its shores. 
Israel has established a number of settlements, military instal- 
lations and other big projects which form an arc stretching 
from the port of Rafah in the central region to the village of 
Tur on the Gulf of Suez. This arc resembles a national frontier. 

There are 1 7 Israeli settlements at the northern end of the 
arc, overlooked by Yamit, the settlement center. Yamit has 
inhabitants who travel to Israel for work. The economic bases 
of the Sinai settlements are agriculture, tourism, and military 
industries. In 1976 a plan was approved for the development 
of the southern region. The Zionist Histadrut foundation pre- 
sented a plan to the government for the creation of 1 10 settle- 
ments between Yamit and Beersheva. 

The following is an abstract of the settlements m the Sinai . 

1. Ofira: founded in southern Sinai near Sharm el-Sheikh 
in 1967 under the name Sharm al-Sheikh Center. In 1970 
work began on the construction of a tourist center. There are 
now three tourist hotels, several restaurants and a plan to settle 
1 ,000 families by the end of 1977. 

2. Di-Zahav: established in 1971 near the Arab village of 
Al-Dhahab on the eastern coast of the Sinai. This settlement 



Key: Armistice Lines (1949) 
International boundaries — 

Source: Ann Lesch 

Allon ("limit of settlement") Road •— •- 
20 40 km 




Nahal Malkl Shua 


Nahal Rol 



Nahal Makhora 





Ma'ale Ephrlam 




Netiv Hagdud 


Nahal Na'aran (or YItav) 

Kochav Ha'Shahar 


Ma'ale Ha'Adumim 


21 Beltel (military government HQ) 

22 Kaddum 

23 Mevo Horon 

24 Canada Park 

25 MItzpe Stialem 

26 Takoah 

27 Elazar 

28 Rosh TzurIm 

29 Afon Shvot 

30 Kfar Etzlon 

31 Kiryat Arba 

32 Atarot 

33 Neve Va'akov 

34 Ramot 

35 Anatot (or Anata) 

36 Ramat Eshkot 

37 French Hfll 

38 Gilo 

39 East Talplot 

40 Jewish Quarter In Jarusalem otd city 

has a strategic importance: it is located on the highway junc- 
tion between Sharm al-Sheikh (to the south), St. Catherine 
Monastery (to the west) and Eilat (to the north). It is affiliated 
with the Independent Liberal Party. 

3. Dikfa: created in [Mayl 1969 on the plains of Rafah 
and enlarged and converted into a civilian settlement in 1971. 
This settlement is also strategically located between the Egyp- 
tian and Palestinian frontier, at the entrance of the Sinai from 
the Gaza Strip near Tel alSheikh Zuwa'td. Its area is 2,500 
dunumsand it is affiliated with the Herut Party. 

4. Yamit: founded on the plains of Rafah in 1973 and 
expanded in 1975. It is a big settlement center with a popula- 
tion of 850 [largely army families and Russian and US immi- 
grants] , providing services to the other settlements in the area. 
There are 250 housing units and the government is preparing 
2,000 additional housing units. It is considered one of the 
tourist attractions in the ^xe^. Plans for Yamit include a popu- 
lation of 250JX)0, an international airport, railway station, 
commercial port, and electronic -based industries. Over 30j000 
beduins formerly lived in ttie area, but were removed for 
"security reasons." 

5. Av-Shalom: a settlement center founded on the plains 
of Rafah in 1972 and later enlarged to accommodate Soviet 

6. Neviot: established to the west of the Arab village of 
Nadibah on the Eilat-Sharm al-Sheikh road in 1971 andexpand- 
ed in 1972. Its area is 2,500 dunums and it is an agricultural- 
tourist center linked to the settlements movement. 

7. Nahal Harofit: founded in 1975 near alArish on the 
site of an Arab well. It belongs to the Bitar movement of the 
Herut Party. Keren Kayemet is now preparing to enlarge the 

8. Nahal Yam: founded in [October] 1967 between al- 
Arish and Kantara. In 1973 it was converted into a civilian 
settlement, belonging to the Agriculture Union, [and supported 
by the Jewish Agency] . 

9. Nahal Sinai: established in 1967, eight kilometers 
south of al-Arish on land the Egyptian government was plan- 
ning for agricultural development. It was settled in 1972 by 
the Herut Bitar movement on an area of 150 dunums. The 50 
or so settlers cultivate olive and citrus groves which had been 
planted by the Egyptian government. 

[10. Missing from original text— Eds.] 

11. Netiv Ha'asarah: created in 1 973 with seven agriculturai 
buildings on 200 dunums for mango cultivation. 

12. Sadot: established in 1971 on 1,500 dunums of the 
Rafah plains. As of spring 1975. 52 families, almost all native 

born Israelis, lived in this moshav. The Jewish Agency selects 
all new members and it, along with the JNF. invests 250,000 
Israeli liras (about $25j000) per family for such ^ings as 
houses, agricultural equipment, roads. They raise vegetables, 
flowers, mangoes and turkeys. 

13. Shalhevet: founded on the west coast of the Sinai in 
1971 on the site of the Egyptian village of Abu-Rudeis, which 
was also the original name of the settlement. It was linked to 
the Israel Petroleum Company (Netive-Neft) and was returned 
to Egypt on December 1, 1975 as part of the second Sinai dis- 
engagement agreement. 

14. Ugda: (a moshav] established in 1975on 2,400dunums 
on the Rafah plains. 

There are preparations for the establishment of the fol- 
lowing settlements on the Rafah plains: Succoth, Nir, Avra- 


hem, Tatme-Yousef, David and HouMt. [The cornerstone of 
TalmeYousef was laid on July 27, 1977. The settlers are 
recent immigrants from South Africa; according to the 7eww/7 
Telegraphic Agency (July 29, 19771 each family will invest 
$15,000 to establish orchards for sub-tropical fruits and 
sunflowers-Eds. 1 


15. Kfar Darom: founded in Wadi Salka in [December] 
1970 and converted into a civilian settlement in 1975. It has 
an area of 400 dunums and is linked to the haPoel haMizrahi 

16. Nahal Morag: established in (November] 1972 between 
Khan Younis and Rafah near Tel Musbah. It is affiliated with 
tfte Labor Party. 

17. Nahal Netzarim; founded in [November] 1972between 
Gaza and Deir AIBalah, near Tel al-A'gul and Al-Nasrietcamptt. 
Its area is 4,000 dunums. It is affiliated with the Herut Party. 

18. Nahal Al-Kativ: founded under the name Nahal Gadish 
in [May) 1973, between Deir AIBalah and Khan Younis. lu 
area is 150 dunums and it is linked with the Mapam Party. 

Sources (or AlQuds article: 

Ah«ron Bl«r, Deoetopment and Settlement. J«rusal«m, 1976; Yearly 
Report of ILA, 1968. 1976; Time magazine, March 1977; Baruch Kim- 
merllng. Struggle Over the Lands. Hebrew University; Publications and 
maps ot the Government information Office. Jerusalem. 



Source: Ann L«scn 

Top: constructing Yamit 
Middle: lookout at Sinai border 

Bottom: Israelis withdrawing 

from Abu Rudeis 




 ^^ ^^k ^ ^^   












J^^i^K-.. - 

' ■'''*Hi»?v' '' 






-*.• ii ••**! 

tf 1M >• .1, 




.-y.rf . 

^>-^^- .-.3 



Middle East Research & Information Project 

P.O.Box 3122 • Columbia Heights Station • Washington. D.C. 20010 






On July 26, 1977, Israeli Prime Minister Mensem Begin de- 
clared 'legal" three new settlements on the occupied Palestin- 
ian West Bank: Kaddum, Ma'ale Ha'Adumim, and Ofer. Al- 
though this act, coming just after Begin's US visit, has been 
criticized by the US administration, it is only the most recent 
m^festation of a consistent Israeli policy of building settle- 
ments in the territory occupied in 1967. The following docu- 
ments taken from the Israeli media outline the stated policy 
and some of the specific settlement plans of both the former 
Labor government and the new Likud government in Israel. 

Partial list of Israeli Settlements 
on the West Bank 

la Nahai Malkl Shua 

1 Mahoia 

2 Nahal Rol 

3 Baka'ot 

4 Hamra 

5 Nahal Uakhora 

6 Argaman 

7 Alrflald 
6 Massuah 

9 Gim 

10 Ma'ale Ephrtam 

11 Phatza-al 

12 Tomer 

13 Gllgal 

14 Netiv Hagdud 

15 Mlvsom 

16 Nahal Na'aran (or Yltav] 

17 Kochav Ha'Shahar 
la Kalla 

19 Ma'ale Ha'Adumim 

20 Oler 

21 Beltel (military governmeni headquartars) 

22 Kaddum 

23 Mavo Horoh 

24 Canada Park 

25 MItzpe Shalem 

26 Takoah 

27 Elazar 

20 Rosh Tzurlm 

29 Alon Shvot 

30 Kfar Etzlon 

31 KIryat Arba 

32 Atarot 

^3 Neva Ya'akov 
j4 Ramot 

35 Analot (or Ansta) 

36 Ramat Eshkol 

37 French Hill 

38 Gilo 

39 Eatt Talplot 

40 Jewish Quarter In Jerutalam Old City 


Key: Armistice Lines 11949) 

Allon ("limit of settlement") Road  

International boundaries 

40 km 




The intention to establish an urban settlement in the Gush 
Ezion area was reported bv the director general of the Zionist 
Organization's settlement division, Yehiel Admoni, at this 
week's cabinet session. 

He delivered an inclusive review about the settlement 
issue, in which he noted that there are four settlements in 
Gush Ezion, with an urban settlement intended for Teqoa, 
which is now a military foothold (that was established about 
a year ago and is manned by Nahal men). Admoni reported 
that the agricultural settlements in Gush Ezion base them- 
selves on land which in the main lies in areas bordering on 
the green line [1948 border! . The settlement division direc 
tor general said in his review there was a plan to establish 
two settlements in the Bet Horon area and about five settle 
ments in the Givan area— northwest of Jerusalem. 

Since the six day war, Admoni said, 94 settlements had 
been established, including 64 beyond the green line-in the 
Golan 21 settlements had been established along with four 
military footholds. The Jordan Valley saw the establishment 
of 1 7 settlements, out of which 13 are permanent settlements. 
Rafah and the Gaza Strip had nine settlements and five Nahal 
footholds. Merhav Shelomo had five settlements. Likewise, 
two footholds (in Kokhav Hashahar and Teqoa) and three 
urban senlements were set up in Judaea and Samaria (the 
West Bank] . The settlement division director general noted 
that on the Golan Heights all agricultural settlement possibi- 
lities had been exhausted-anything that would be set up in 
the future, he said, would have to be on an industrial basis. 
Admoni added that in the Jordan Valley (from Bet She'an 
down the Ein Gedi) there are 150,000 dunams of arable land 
in areas with no Arab villages. The main problem was, he 
said, the perpetual lack of water. 

All the settlements beyond the green line numtier 6,500 
souls, plus a little less than 1,000 in Qiryat Arba. To date 
about 2.6 billion Israeli pounds (about $350 million) have 
been spent on settlements in the territories, Admoni added. 
Housing Minister Avraham Ofer noted in the course of that 
cabinet meeting that 95 apartments had been offered for sale 
in Qiryat Arba, while only 19 applications had been received. 
Mr. Ofer said that contrary to the low demand in Qiryat Arba, 
there was a great demand for apartments in Yamit. 

Justice Minister Chaim Tsadok, who is also chairman of 
the ministerial committee for Jerusalem, said that in 1968 
there had been 275,000 residents in Jerusalem, out of which 
204,000 were Jews (74 %). In 1975 the number of residents 
in Jerusalem was 365,000, out of which 259.000 were Jews 
(72.6 %). The increase in the Jewish sertor was by 28 % and 
in the non-Jewish sector by 35 %, said Zadok. The justice 
minister went on to say that there were various plans on ex- 
panding residential settlement in Jerusalem, but differences 
of opinion existed in the ministerial committee. 

Source: Yehvda Litani, Ha'arctz. May 12, 1976, in Foreign 
Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), May 13, 1976. 

O: Does The Cabinet have a clear overall policy regardirtg 
senlements beyond the green line? The impression is that 
decisions are being randomly adopted. What do you think? 
A: If you ask me whether the Government of Israel has ever 
adopted an inclusive conceptual resolution on where to senle 
and where not, HI tell you: such a plan has never been ap- 
proved. However, if you sum up the empirical behavior of the 
Government of Israel in determining the points of settlement, 
you'll find that they add up to a concept: that is, settlements 
are placed in strategically important areas along existing 
borderlines or in the vicinity of areas likely to become border 
lines in the future. The areas where we settle have no Arab 
residents and we are not evicting Arab settlements in order to 
replace them with Jewish ones. The truth is that I'd like to 
see a faster rate of senlement and bigger settlements in those 
areas which we are settling and with which I am in agreement. 
I must say, at the same time, that in recent years a laudable 
settlement plan has been carried out. Dozens of settlements 
have been set up, but I prefer not to mention numbers. 

Q; Is a situation liable to be generated where the government 
would decide to remove permanent settlements? 
A: A government that sets up settlements is interested in their 
permanent existence. At the same time, however, I'm not 
ruling out the possibility that we shall have very great debates 
about one point or another. I can even foresee a total debate 
about the entire settlement issue: settlements are, in my view, 
one of the greater levers in our political struggle over the de- 
marcation of defensible borders within the framework of a 
peace treaty. I see in these settlements, if they are deep-rooted 
and properly formed and organized, a great contribution to 
the security of the state, both regarding the day-by-day 
tactical aspect, as well as the task of a well-fortified territorial 
defense in the context of Israel's defensive deployment. . . . 

. . .Demographically, the future map of Israel must insure 
the state's Jewish character, even if it will always include a 
considerable Arab minority enjoying full equality of rights. 
I'd like Israel to be in firm strategic control of the Golan 
Heights, even if we come to terms over Judaea and Samaria 
with a view to an Arab solution to the territories densely 
populated by Palestinian Arabs. We have to have control over 
the Jordan Valley from the hilltops, which are completely 
desolate, and over the Judaean desert down to Qiryat Arba 
east of Hebron. I'd be very glad to see the southern Gaza 
Strip and the Rafah Approaches become an area pulsating with 
Jewish life, thus constituting a barrier on the historical road of 
invasion from the land of the Nile. . . .I'd say that I'm striving 
for a solution that would give us a complete country strate- 
gically and a complete country from a Jewish national stand- 
point and at the same time provide an honorable answer to the 
Arab Palestinian factor. 

On Kaddum 

If they were to invite me to talk with them I would willingly 
agree in order to try and persuade them that they are causing 
damage to the settlement ideal and that they belong to those 


damage to the settlement ideal and that they belong to those 
who are standing in the way of the settlement that we so very 
much need in outlying, strategic and essential areas and that 
they are largely responsible for placing the problem of settle- 
ment on the table of international deliberations, something 
that we have avoided for consecutive years. 

Sources: Interview by Refa'el Bashon. Yedi'ot Aharonot, 
May 14, 1976. m FBIS, May 17, 1976; statement on IDF 
Radio, August 31. 1976. in FBIS, September 1, 1976. 



Former Defense Minister [present Foreign Minister) Moshe 
Dayan called yesterday for an arrangement whereby Jews and 
Arabs would live together in the administered territories, with 
the Arabs remaining Jordanians and the land remaining under 
Israeli control. 

Speaking to Moshav movement members of his Labor 
Party [Dayan left the Labor Party when he joined the present 
Likud government! , the Knesset member said the decision on 
what to do about the territories was the most important one 
facing Israel since the founding of the state. The decision has 
to be taken now, Dayan stressed, not left for some messianic 
time when peace might come. In a swipe at Professor Yigal 
Yadin [head of the DMC party in the 1977 elections, which 
refused to join the ruling Likud coalition, see MERIP Reports. 
no. 58] , who has said Israel should make big withdrawals in 
return for peace, he said: "Yigal Yadin claims he does not 
believe peace will come in his lifetime. Then let him come out 
ind say what he believes must be done in his lifetime, and 
more important, during the next year." He stressed that 
Israelis were in the territories by right, not as conquerors. 

Asked what his map of Israel looked like, Dayan answered 
that he was for giving the Arabs in the territories self-govern- 
ment and letting them have or keep Jordanian citizenship. 
But the IDF should be the only army in the area and Jews 
should be free to settle. The Gaza Strip would be entirely 
Arab, but there should be Jewish settlements in Pithat Rafah, 
Sharm as-Sheikh and the West Bank— on the top of the ridge, 
not just in the Jordan Rift (as under the Allon Plan). These 
settlements must be made by government decision, however, 
and not in a haphazard way. 

Questioned whether the Arabs would agree to this, he 
replied that if we had to do things according to the desires 
of the Arabs we could pack our bags and go to Canada. Dayan 
then emphasized his point again: "I am not talking about a 
partition, but of finding a modus vivendi with the lOF in 
control. It is not an ideal plan but it is one you can live with. 
It is also not an easy decision to take, but it is one that must 
be taken as soon as possible, otherwise without our koouoog it 
another 10 years can go by. This decision is important also 
so that we can activate settlement policies in the West Bank. 
t is also important for ourselves, to emphasize that we are not 
roretgners in the West Bank. Judaea and Samaria is Israel and 
we are r>et there as foreign conquerors but as returners to 
Ztoh. An Israeli citizen shouldn't have to request a visa from 
Mayor Jabari to visit Hebron." 

Source: Excerpts from Jerusalem Post, July 15, 1976, in 
FBIS.yu/y 15,1976. 


The loud and repeated words about the need for "fattening" 
Jerusalem— a concept recently invented— can still be considered 
mere words. The decision whether and how to "fatten" the 
capital is in the hands of the commission of ministers for the 
affairs of Jerusalem, w^ich needs a long time to take the 
decision -where and when the new "belt" of settlements will 
be built around Jerusalem and what the thickness of that 
"fattening belt" will be. 

The decision, if indeed a decision will be made by the 
commission, will be the result of a series of complicated con- 
siderations involving political and social problems such as 
demographic and transportation needs. The difficulty in arriv- 
ing at the final decision will probably be further complicated 
because there is no one general plan for the "fattening" of 
Jerusalem. There are three such plans: the Ministry of Hous- 
ing constructed an independent plan; the Israel Lar>d Admin- 
istration [I LA] distributed a green booklet which includes 
its own proposal; end the chairman of the settlement depart- 
ment of the Jewish Agency, Professor Ra'anan Weitz, drew 
his "fattening" plan. The various "fattening" plans concern 
construction north of the capital as well as south of Jerusalem. 
However, the most problematic are the "northern" plans 
which, nc doubt, will raise the loudest discussions. 

The first 'lattening" plan was proposed to the Ministry 
of Housing by architect Shmuel Shaked. According to that 
plan two or three new cities and a number of neighborhoods 
will be built near Jerusalem, beyond the "green line." The 
new settlements are designed for "securing the security, the 
future, the Jewish character and the national character of 
Jerusalem in the future." 

According to the Ministry of Housing proposal, a town of 
1200 families in Givan and an urban neighborhood of 250 
families in Gabel Muktam (situated 4 km. northeast of the 
Horon entrance and 15 km. from Ramlah and Lod) are plan- 
ned. However, various factions quickly expressed their reser- 

Among the first to express their reservations were mem- 
bers of Jerusalem's municipal council. According to them, the 
"fattening" of Jerusalem by means of building the external 
settlement belt will weaken the development of Jerusalem it- 
self. They fear that directing means of construction as well as 
young couples, old inhabitants and new immigrants to the new 
city in Givan, would cost potential inhabitants for Jerusalem, 
which struggles to keep its Jewish identity, in the face of the 
quick natural increase of the Arab population. 

Execution of the "fattening" plans-north, east or south 
of Jerusalem— involves expropriation of land now owned by 
Arabs. The decision on additional expropriation of land is pri- 
marily a political decision which has to be made by the politi- 
cal echelon. Nevertheless, architect Brotskus who belongs to 
the Ministry of Interior saw fit to comment upon that matter. 
In a detailed memorandum about the construction plans of 
the Ministry of Housing, Brotskus wrote: 'There is sense and 
purpose in building the settlements as proposed in the plan 
only if there is an intention to annex that area and the area 
between the settlements and Jerusalem to the Israeli state, and 
in this way to fatten' Jerusalem." Architect Brotskus thinks 
that if indeed there is no escape from the political "risks" 
involved in expropriation of land, one wonders whether it 
is not better to take that "bold step" but in a different way, 
i.e., by expropriation of larHJ in order to strengthen Jewish 


positions in Jerusalem itself— e.g., the area between the French 
Hill and Neve Ya'akov— "instead of creating territories for dis- 
tant suburban settlements." 

Those who object to establishing small settlements or 
towns, which would be some kind of "satellites" around Jeru- 
salem, point out that the expenses of establishing those 
"satellites" are very heavy, that there will be employment 
difficulties and that the new settlements might become a 
burden upon Jerusalem, instead of "fattening" the Jewish 
settlement around the city. 

Opposed to the plan of the Ministry of Housing which 
proposes a city for 1200 families in Givan, the ILA proposes 
its own plan for the "northern region." According to that 
plan, in Lower Beit Horon a city will be build on the scale 
of Bat-Yam or Rishon Le'Zion which will include 25-40 
thousand inhabitants after three years. 'The place does not 
necessitate, as far as the city is concerned nor as far as the 
other settlements included in the plan are concerned, a signi- 
ficant deviation from the "green line" borders. It concerns 
only a few kilometers, which constitute a reasonable deviation 
in the framework of any agreement." This Is written in the 
plan of the ILA which emphasizes that there is neither inten- 
tion nor need to propose special employment solutions for the 
new city, since it would belong to the central region and 
would be situated about 15 km. from Led and Ben-Gurion 

Parallel to the large urban settlement, the plan of the ILA 
proposes that between Jerusalem and the new city in Lower 
Beit Horon, some rural settlements will be spread. The loca- 
tion of the proposed settlements— Upper Beit Horon. Givan, 
Nebi Samuel and Ma'ale Abram— is topographically significant, 
and the distance between every two rural settlements wilt be 
about five km. 

The third plan for "fattening" Jerusalem in the north is 
the plan of the chairman of the settlement department of the 
Jewish Agency, Ra'anan Weitz. According to his proposal, 
in Givan, in the north of Jerusalem, a series of industrial 
villages should be established instead of a city. The principal 
argument for that proposal is that establishing a city of over 
25 thousand inhabitants might interfere with the desirable 
rate of populating Jerusalem by Jews, whereas the establish- 
ment of industrial villages "does not cause any demographic 
harm. It involves a relatively small investment in comparison 
with the urban alternative, it will involve a relatively small 
size of land which should be obtained from the Arabs, and 
because of the proposed cooperative structure of the settle- 
ment it will not exert pressure on the Jerusalem center, which 
is over loaded." 

According to Ra'anan Weitz' plan, four settlements based 
on sophisticated industry and services will be established in 
"Gush Givan." "Since alt the agricultural land in the region is 
tilled by local villages, there is no possibility of concentrating 
sufficient land for the maintenance of a settlement." Weitz 
states. "On the other hand, the geographic location of the 
region on the axis which connects the industrial regions of 
the plain with those of Jerusalem can assure accelerated devel- 
' opment of Industrial or services plants. The natural larKlscape, 
the historical significance and the short distance from Atarot 
airport can contribute to the development of popular national 
or international summer resorts." 

Architect Brotskus. who is responsible for the plans in 
the Ministry of Interior, criticizes Ra'anan Weitz' plan. In his 
detailed memorandum, he expresses his reservations about 

the proposed "dispersal" of the settlements. In addition, he 
criticizes the plan of industrial villages, which, according to 
Mr. Brotskus, "have not been proved as a legitimate 'creature', 
and they probably have no chance to succeed." 

Some argue that repeated words about the plans for 
"fattening" Jerusalem have caused disruption of the general 
planning policy in the state by directing investments to devel- 
opment in the "fattening" regions, whereas it is preferable 
to fatten "internal" Jerusalem— by means of increasing its 
Jewish population. 

The three different plans which contain long-range devel- 
opment objectives have already been submitted to the com- 
mission of ministers for the affairs of Jerusalem, headed by 
Chaim Tsadok, minister of justice. However, the commission 
will probably not discuss those plans before a professional 
inter-ministerial commission completes examination of the 
planning and urban aspects in their entirety and their effect 
on the city of Jerusalem and on other sensitive regions which 
necessitate concentration of resources and efforts on the part 
of the state. 

Source: Yehiel Limor. Ma'ariv, August 6, 1976, translation 
provided by Israel Shahak. 



Seven industrial plants, mainly in the metallurgy fields, are 
being set up in Ma'ale Ha'Adumim. Each plant will employ 
about 50 workers. The ITIM correspondent reports that a 
number of industrialists will soon transfer their plants to the 
area. A defense industry plant will also be transferred. Defense 
Minister Peres promised the help of his ministry for the new 
plants which will be established in the area. 

Our reporter has learned that an urban settlement is to 
be built in Ma'ale Ha'Adumim. A special committee is meet 
ing to decide the exact location of the settlement. Members 
of the committee include the commander of the central 
region, the head of the Jerusalem region of the housing min 
istry and engineers from a private firm. This morning, the 
cornerstone was laid for the first factory in the Ma'ale Ha'Adu 
mim industrial zone. 

Source: Jerusalem Radio, March 22. 1977, m FBIS. March 
29. 1977. 


The Likud leaders announced this week that the Alton plan is 
dead. However, although they [Likud] never accepted rt as a 
binding document, some 100 settlements have been estab- 
lished beyond the green line, from the Golan Heights in the 
.north to Ofira ISharm as-Sheikh] in the south, on the basis 
of this plan. Some 8,000 settlers live in these settlements, 
and the value of their agricultural produce this year will total 
700 million pounds [about $70 million] . 

Since the six day war, the government has allocated about 
4 billion pounds [about $400 million] for settlement in the 
administered territories. Therefore, it appears that without 
trumpets or vociferous statements, the Alignment government 
has established numerous facts on the ground. It is difficult 
to imagine that the Likud government will shelve the Align- 
ment government plans for the coming year. These plans call 
for the establishment of urban centers in the Golan Heights, 
the Rafah Approaches, the Jordan Valley and a block of 
settlements north of Jerusalem. Reporter Shimon Schiffer 
reviews 10 years of settlement beyond the green line. 

Schiffer: US Embassy officials in Israel have recently 
shown great interest in what is takir>g place in the sphere of 
settlement beyond the green line. A senior embassy official 
has contacted the Housing Ministry on several occasions to 
find out what is being done in Mashah, east of Kefar Sava. 
He was told politely, but firmly, that he must contact the 
chairman of the ministerial committee for settlement affairs. 

Informed people already distinguish between the period 
^/t)efore the Carter administration and that of the Carter admin- 
istration regarding the US attitude to settlement in the terri- 
tories. Only recently have US representatives in Israel allowed 
themselves to express open discontent with what is being 
done. A joke currently in circulation says that a senior US 
official recently asked an Israeli politician: How many trucks 
will you need to evacuate the settlers from the territories? 

This question has bothered the settlers themselves from time 
to time. However, it can be said that the question has become 
vital these days in view of the possibility of negotiations taking 
place to determine the peace borders of the State of Israel. 
Minister Yisrael Gatlli, chairman of the ministerial comr.irttee 
for settlement affairs, has no doubts regarding the future of 
the settlements in the territories and their place in the expec- 
ted negotiations. 

Galrti: I am convinced that what we have accomplished 
from the six day war until now constitutes an extremely signi- 
ficant reality from a political, security and national point of 
view. The settlements constitute a deployment of extreme 
value that expands the infrastructure of the State of Israel and 
offers a dimension of entrenchment and firmness. We have 
seen this even within the framework of disengagement of 
forces agreements: as happened in the Golan Heights, the exis- 
tence of the settlements was very valuable. This is especially 
true when the question involves a framework of negotiations 
for permanent peace. Ho settlement was established on the 
assumption that we would abandon it. 

Schiffer: The steps for settlement in Judaea and Samaria 
were slow. Only after the Khartoum conference in 1969 were 
regional plans prepared for settlement in the territories. What 
were the basic assumptions of the planners? Professor Ra'anan 
Weitz, head of the settlement departrrwnt, answers this 

Weitz: Where an Israeli settlement is established, it should 
be a permanent settlement that should not be removed urxler 
any military or political change. Our settlements have always 
established the facts of the map of Israel. Therefore, before 
establishing a fact, it is necessary to think carefully whether 
it will be possible to maintain this fact even if political and 
military conditions change. Another assumption was that a 
settlement must be made primarily to insure the security of 
Israel. In other words, this is a subject that is not negotiable, 
and if we really stick to it, it will be possible to prove to our 
supporters the justness of our action. 

Schiffer; The spread of settlements increased, and as long 
as calm continued and no reaction came from the supporter, 
as Ra'anan Weitz calls the United States, the planners contin- 
ued to follow the line described above under the Instructions 
of the chairman and members of the ministerial committee 
for settlement affairs. 

Gatili: I cannot cite one single case of US pressure regard- 
ing the establishing of one specific settlement or another, and 
I cannot cite any case in which consideration of the US atti- 
tude has tipped the balance regarding one specific settlement 
or another. In general, we determined the location of settle- 
ments on the basis of various considerations— including politi- 
cal considerations, the prospect of achieving defensible bor- 
ders, limitations stemming from the presence of local residents 
and problems of land and water, and limitations stemming 
from the prospects of the political struggle. 

Schiffer: Yehlel Admoni this week ended his job as head 
of the settlement department of the Zionist Organization and 
the Jewish Agency. With regard to future action, he proposes: 

Admoni: Whatever the considerations for settlement may 
be. the consideration of giving people the chance to live a full 
life is perhaps the central one. The scattering of settlements 
here and there with no connection between them and without 
the possibility of building a general system seems to me 
basically wrong. 


Schiffer: Minister Galili savs things in a different manner 
which perhaps for the first time underlines the differences of 
opinion between htm and the Likud. 

Galili: We must not rush to establish new settlements in 
the heart of Samaria, which is densely populated and also 
does not have the strategic security significance which would 
make it necessary to settle there. There is reason to assume 
that there is a difference between statements in the opposition 
and the responsibility and limitations that bind a government. 
It is clear that we are involved in a struggle for permanent 
peacetime twrders. It is clear that there are world powers that 
want to deprive us of all the achievements of the six day war 
and push us back to the June 4, 1967 borders. There is a con- 
sensus among the people not to return to the June 1967 bor- 
ders. The struggle over settlement is an organic part of the 
struggle over the peace borders. I believe that the State of 
Israel will mobilize the spiritual, popular and political forces 
necessary to withstand this struggle awaiting it in the future. 

Schiffer: So far, all the senlements established in the 
territories had been approved by the ministerial committee 
for settlement affairs. The settlement in Kaddum was the first 
challenge to the concept of settlement guided by security con- 
siderations. The slogan of settlement in all parts of the land of 
Israel raised by the Likud and the National Religious Party is 
a concept that will have to stand the test of action by the next 

Source: Excerpts from Jerusalem Radio, June 11, 1977, m 
FBlS./une 14. 1977. 


The future of Judaea and Samaria and senlement beyond the 
green line, as expressed in the Likud platform and as voiced 
by Likud emissary Shmuel Katz in the United States, will 
constitute one of the most controversial issues in the prime 
minister's talks with the US President. Agriculture Minister 
Afiel Sharon this week began examining plans for settlement 
beyond the green line. Last Friday, the minister was handed a 
plan prepared by a Likud team. The team was headed by 
Knesset member Yigal Cohen. The plan, which is based on the 
Likud platform, proposes the establishment of five large urban 
centers in Judaea and Samaria in which some 150,000 people 
will live. Since the prime minister's statement in Kaddum 
(when Begin described all of "Judaea and Samaria" as "liber- 
ated" not "occupied" territory] , the government has dis- 
played caution in its pronouncements on settlement t)eyond 
the green line. According to a decision by Prime Minister 
Menahem Begin, the government will discuss the issue only 
after Mr. Begin's visit to Washington. In this spirit, the agricul- 
ture minister announced yesterday that as far as he knows, the 
Likud plan has not been approved by the cabinet. The Likud 
plan will be submitted to the ministerial committee for settle- 
ment affairs for discussion when the prime minister returns 
from the United States. Correspondent Shimon Schiffer has 
filed this report on the Likud plan. 

Schiffer: The Allon plan is dead— on the map, in the 
thinking and in the political conception of Israel, Prime 
Minister Menahem Begin has said when speaking about the 
future and about what is expected in planning settlement 

beyond the green line. Does another plan already exist— the 
Sharon plan, named after the chairman of the ministerial 
committee for settlement affairs? Ariel Sharon says that 
various plans are being examined. 

Sharon: The first thing is that the government will first 
of all carry out the settlement plans th?t have already been 
decided. There is no reason to suspend these plans. Addition- 
ally, I believe this government will give an impetus to settle- 
ment and new plans will definitely be drawn up in addition to 
the present plans. 

Schiffer: Intensive discussions were held on this subject 
last week. The time has come to examine the desires of the 
movement which was in the opposition— a movement which 
spoke about widescale settlement activity in Judaea and 
Samaria. Questions were asked. Is it at all possible to carry 
out these plans in the reality in which the State of Israel 

The planners were called to examine the plan which was 
drawn up about half a year ago and which has now been sub- 
mitted anew to Ariel Sharon by Knesset member Yigal Cohen, 
a member of Moshav Tel Adashim and a leading advocate of 
settlement in the Likud. The proposal is called "the urban and 
rural settlement plan in the Land of Israel." The plan is also 
signed by Ya'acov Eigess, a former head of the settlement 
department of the Jewish Agency and Professor Ezra Zohar. 
Knesset member Yigal Cohen says: 

Cohen: I definitely hope the Likud will carry out this 
plan. This plan served as the Likud platform on the question 
of urban and rural settlement. It has been examined and is 
reliable. My evaluation is that we shall consider its implemen- 
tation. We had a meeting this Friday with the agriculture min- 
ister and passed to him the details of the plan. We shall, of 
course, assist and follow up the implementation. The agricul- 
ture minister asked us to submit the plan to him. I did that 
this week after my meeting with him. He wants to study it. 
We shall, of course, meet again and discuss the details. 

Schiffer: Those who drafted the proposed plan speak 
about settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel -from the 
Golan Heights, through Galilee, and as far as Sinai and Sharm 
as-Sheikh. We shall concentrate on what is planned for imple- 
mentation in Judaea and Samaria. According to the proposed 
plan, several towns will be established in Judaea and Samaria 
in the coming four years— a town in the area of At-Tayyibah. 
a town in the area of Mashah. a town in the area of Beit Sira 
on the northern Jerusalem-Tel Aviv route, a town in Givan, 
a town in Teqoa and a town in Ma 'ale Ha'Adumim. 

Cohen: Regarding settlement in Judaea and Samaria, the 
plan is based mainly on a widescale urt)an settlement. It takes 
into consideration the land and water limitations. In our opin- 
ion, it definitely permits the transfer of a large numt)er of Jews 
to the center of Samaria. This will be done by transfering to 
this area all public construction which was planned according 
to a master plan of the previous housing ministry for the 
coastal area-in Holon, Herzliya, Bat Yam, Tel Aviv. All con- 
struction will be done using suitable and good quality material 
and will attract Jews, who will pass to the center of Samaria 
while maintaining their present places of employment. 

Schiffer: This is the Likud plan for settlement. In order to 
carry out the plan, Knesset members from the coalition parties 
have set up a permanent forum to deal with settlement affairs. 

Source: Excerpts from Jerusalem Radio, July 2, 1977, in 
FBIS./u/y 7.1977. 


Senator Abourezk. The hearings are recessed until 10 o'clock to- 
morrow morning. They will resume in room 6226, which is down the 
hall on this floor. 

We thank you very much. 

[Wliereupon, at 1 ;05 p.m., the subcommittee recessed.] 




U.S. Senate, 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization, 

Committee on the Judiciary, 

Washington^ D.C 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:05 a.m., in room 
6226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator James Abourezk [act- 
ing chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present : Senator Abourezk. 

Staff present: Wendy Grieder, legislative assistant to Senator 

Senator Abourezk. The committee will come to order. 

Our first witness this morning is Dr. Salim Tamari, professor of 
sociology at Birzeit University located in the occupied territories. 

Dr. Tamari, we welcome you to the subcommittee's hearings. Do 
you have a statement you would like to give to us ? 


Mr. Tamari. Yes ; I have a few remarks, Senator. 

I reside in the town of Ramallah in the occupied territories. I would 
like to address my remarks to two issues which are of concern to me 
and which I have observed during my teaching experience in Birzeit 

The first issue concerns the cultural aspects of the occupation dur- 
ing the past 10 years. The second one concerns the employment of 
Arab labor in Israeli enterprises. 

This past June was the 10th year of Israeli occupation of those 
Palestinian territories which were not occupied in the war of 1948. 
Most of us living under the occupation have suffered all kinds of 
grievances, but, of course, it touches us in different manners depending 
on our position and situation. 

For instance, those of us who were forced by circumstances to work 
in Israel have come in closer touch with some manifestations of Israeli 
oppression which have not been seen by others. 

As an instructor in a small college near the city of Jerusalem, I have 
been very close to the treatment by Israeli soldiers and military au- 
thorities of faculty members and students and other town dwellers. 

The most salient aspect which I have personally observed in the 
Israeli occupation has been the treatment of student demonstrators 



who have resisted the impact of Israeli rule with all the means that 
were at their disposal. 

I understand your committee has heard various testimonies about 
the establishment of Israel settlements in areas of the West Bank and 
the Gaza territories, plus the other two Arab areas occupied, the Sinai 
Peninsula and the Golan Heights. 

During these 10 years of occupation, those of us who remained in 
the West Bank and the other Palestinians in Gaza utilized whatever 
was at our disposal to express ourselves. One legitimate means of ex- 
pressing ourselves within the confines of Israeli occupation was the 
press in Jerusalem and the cultural activities which already existed 
in the West Bank during the Jordanian rule. 

We have library associations, theater clubs, and a few literary maga- 
zines. All these instruments of cultural manifestations have been sub- 
ject to extreme forms of control by the Israelis. 

For instance, there are two theatrical groups in the town of 
Ramallah where I live which have been putting on plays expressing 
Palestinian cultural identity. These plays, in order to be performed, 
have to be submitted, that is, the script has to be submitted in advance 
to the Israeli military officer in charge of cultural activities to be ap- 
proved. Usually approval does not relieve the members expressing 
their views from interrogation later and quite often what is on the 
surf are as literary expression of cultural identity is a cause for harass- 
ment and improvement. 

We have a group of teachers and students who have been issuing a 
journal of folklore which has been subject to extreme censorship by the 
Israelis. We have only been able to issue six issues. The journal even- 
tually ceased publication. All references to Palestinian identity, to ex- 
press a folk culture, is frowned upon by the Israelis since it negates 
the view of the present regime, and also the presumably liberal gov- 
ernment of Premier Rabin before Mr. Begin came to power, that this 
land is the land of Israel, and the Arab population is an alien force 
inhabiting it. 

Students have constantly been subject to interrogation and night ar- 
rests and administrative detention without any specific charges. This 
goes on as a daily event. 

Teachers are also subject to harassment. One of my colleagues. Dr. 
Aruri, who is a physics instructor, has been in prison 3 years so far 
under this administrative detention rule without being charged with 
one single charge — political or criminal. This law of administrative 
detention has been used against scores of intellectuals, students, and 
the public in general. It is a heritage of British colonial rule promul- 
gated in 1945 against terrorist activities and used equally against 
Arab and Jewish partisans in 1945, but also now being used by the 
Israel Government against Arabs. 

Imprisonment, however, is not the only aspect of repression of stu- 
dents and academic circles. Deportation has been used, extensively by 
the Israeli authorities. 

In the institution where I teach, the president of the university. Dr. 
Nasir, was deported to Lebanon in 1974, after Mr. Arafat, the head of 
the PLO, appeared in New York at the General Assembly, there have 
been various protests throughout the occupied territories expressing 


solidarity of the local population with the PLO. After that, the Israeli 
authorities sought professional organizations and heads of local coun- 
cils as scapegoats to quell the demonstrations. 

After Mr. Arafat appeared, not only the head of our university, but 
two members of the board of tinistees, Dr. Tobasi — who is also the 
head of the dental association in the West Bank — and Mr. Abdul 
Jawwed Salih, mayor of Al-Bireh — both members of the board of 
trustees — were expelled to Jordan and Lebanon. 

These people were not given any chance for a trial. They were simi- 
larly deported and with them scores of other citizens of the West Bank 
who were neither charged formally, as they requested, and as we 
insisted — and still insist — in every case of such deportation, but to no 

Various democratic 

Senator Abourezk. May I int,errupt ? 

Let me ask you about the case of Dr. Nasir. I have talked with him 
since liis deportation. I think it is useful to put on the record exactly 
what the circumstances were. 

As I understand it, he did not take part in demonstrations at Birzeit 
University. He did not lead them. He had nothing to do with them. 
That was his statement to me. 

Do you know if that is correct or incorrect ? 

Mr. Tamari. Yes ; I was in Birzeit at the time of his deportation. The 
situation was boiling over because of several incidents. One was the 
feeling that there was an impending settlement to take place in the 
West Bank and that the Palestinians were about to have a state of 
their own. Students were demonstrating in solidarity with the PLO. 
There were attempts by tlie Israelis at the time to establish a puppet 
regime called administrative autonomy. This is the political context 
in which the deportation took place. 

The Israelis moved that night by calling Dr. Nasir for interroga- 
tion. He was taken immediately to the military compound, blind- 
folded, driven by jeep to the Israeli border, and allowed to go with 
another member of the board of trustees, through the Lebanese- Israeli 
border completely blindfolded and without escort. 

This, I imagine, is a situation which could have killed him very 
easily because this is a military zone in which, how should we say, 
soldiers act on the spot. He was fortunately not hurt. He was received 
at the other end. 

Dr. Nasir was subsequently, in retrospect that is, charged with hav- 
ing incited students to riot. I was at the university when the demon- 
strations took place. It was customary for the teaching staff of Birzeit 
University and Dr. Nasir was included in that, to form a cordon be- 
tween the Israel soldiers and the demonstrating students as an act of 

Although we sympathize with the demonstration, we made a point 
not to participate and as to not to give a legal excuse for the Israelis 
to intervene. 

We also wanted to keep under control some activities by some 
students who might attack soldiers and that could be used as an act 
of provocation to use firearms. 


That act of protection was later used by the Israelis to indict Dr. 
Hanna Nasir similarly without trial of having organized the demon- 

Senator Abourezk. Yes; thank you. Please continue. 

Mr. Tamart. The other aspect that I would like to address your com- 
mittee with is the employment by Israel of between 60,000 to 80,000 
workers in the occupied territories. We do not have exact figures be- 
cause many of these workers aie hired hands and do not go through 
labor exchanges. 

On the surface, Israel presents this issue as promoting the welfare 
of the population. However, upon investigation we find that these 
laborers perform as cheap labor in Israeli enterprises like factories, 
but especially in construction. Israel, at the moment, needs a vast 
amount of housing settlements, both for Jewish settlers in the occupied 
territories as well as for Jewish immigrants, most of whom at the 
moment come from the Soviet Union from Georgia and from Russia. 
(I think the last count is about 76 settlements in Gaza, the Golan 
Heights, the West Bank and Sinai.) 

Our workers are constructing houses for Israeli immigrants to come 
and settle quite often in land wihich has been confiscated from Arab 

The Jordan Valley and the area around Nablus, where land has been 
confiscated from farmers, ostensibly for security reasons because it is 
near the border. Later cooperative farms were established for the 

The Arab peasants, Palestinian peasants, who use to own these lands, 
and having lost their farms to use, have been forced as a result of this 
act to find employment as hired hands on the very farms which they 
owned. This is the situation of around 80,000 workers who commute 
every day from Gaza and the West Bank to Israel. Not all of them, of 
course, are peasants. Many of them are refugees from the war of 1948. 

From their wages, which on the average is 40 percent less than the 
average wage of Israeli workers, is deducted significant amounts of 
money ostensibly for social services, medical insurance, unemployment 
benefits, et cetera, none of which — and this is my point — is renumer- 
ated back to the workers as services (with the exception of Arab 
workers from East Jerusalem who are partly organized by the Israeli 
labor unions and do receive part compensation for these deductions) . 
Other than that, most of the 80,000 workers receive no benefits for the 

In effect, what I am saying is that they are hired as cheap labor in 
Israel enterprises, especially construction. They are the last to be hired 
when there is need for their labor and they are the first to become re- 
dundant when there is a recession in the Israeli economy. This has 
already taken place after the war of 1973, and particularly in 1974 and 
1975 when thousands of Arab workers became redundant and found 
no employment. 

Senator Abourezk. Do you know the extent of land confiscation in 
the territories ? 

Mr. Tamari. I do not have figures with me. However, I would ven- 
ture to say that most of the confiscation has been taking place in the 
Jordan Valley area and the Rafah approaches in Gaza district, and 
the Nablus area. 


Senator Abourezk. Would you call that good farmland or poor 
farmland ? 

Mr. Tamari. In the Jordan Valley good land was confiscated. The 
west bank, in general, is very arid. The little farmland that is good 
there exists in the northern districts, in Nablos and in the Jordan 

Most of these Israeli settlements which have been established so far, 
aside from the Golan Heights, have been in the Jordan Valley area. 
Ostensibly, as I said, for security reasons, but most of them are agri- 
cultural communities. 

New Jewish settlers are brought from the population of Israel 
proper to these areas. 

May I continue ? 

Senator Abourezk. Go right ahead. 

Mr. Tamari. My last point is this. I want to mention about both the 
oppressive practices against students who have been in the forefronts 
of protests (as they usually are everywhere) in the occupied territories 
against Israeli occupation and the utilization of cheap Arab labor 
which has been a force in the outmigration of thousands of Arabs out- 
side the Palestinian territories. 

This is crucial for several reasons. People who migrate are the young 
of the population. These are young males who usually have to support 
their families by seeking employment in other Arab States, and more 
recently in Jordan, where there has been a construction boom. 

This has created a situation where academicians and professionals, 
and also laborers who were made redundant and who no longer can 
find employment in the occupied territories, or in Israel, as a result of 
the recession, have left the country, many of them because of political 
repression, and created a demographic imbalance in that section of the 
population which is most productive. 

So, if we look at the structure of the population between the ages 
of 30 years and 44 years, we find that the ratio of females to males is 
in excess. The consequence of this in social terms is very severe because 
it creates a distorted composition of the population. It leaves a very 
important section of the productive population out of the country and 
creates conditions for further reduction of the population in the occu- 
pied territories. 

I do not say that Israel is enforcing measures of emigration by physi- 
cal means, but it is creating the conditions whereby the dwindling of 
the population of the West Bank and Gaza is becoming a reality. 

This, I would insist — and many people who think like me would 
insist — has been the consistent policy of the Israeli authorities since 
1967. That is to make a place for potential Jewish settlements through- 
out the occupied territories, not only the West Bank and Gaza, but also 
in occupied Syria, the Golan Heights, occupied Egypt in the Sinai — 
where vast lands have been confiscated and new settlements have been 

I think my colleague, Dr. Dakkak will address, in part, this issue. 

I thank you. 

Senator Abourezk. Yesterday there was testimony on a couple of 
different points that I would like to ask you about. 

First of all, do you believe tliat there is a pattern of harassment 
and oppression against intellectuals and political leaders which would 

20-488 O - 78 - 6 


result in emptying out the occupied territories of that political leader- 
ship leaving only what would be called a peasant class or working 
class which could be made available for cheap labor for the Israel 
Government and the Israeli industry ? 

Mr. Tamari. I think the repression is generalized, but I do think 
there is selective pressure against those sections of the population 
which we might call the intelligencia who can most articulate the 
grievances of the population in the occupied territories. 

At the moment a large amount of this oppression is directed against 
those mayors in the West Bank who have been consistent in proposing 
that the only solution to the current debate about settlement of the 
occupied territories is by the formation of an independent Palestine 
state — independent from both Israel and Jordan. 

In 1976, in the election for the municipal councils, there was an 
attempt by the Israeli authorities to create an alternative leadership 
of the Palestinians composed of mayors who would create a presumed 
autonomous zone. 

That attempt failed through the defeat of several slates which were 
either openly pro-Israel or conciliatory to Israeli rule, and slates of 
nationalist candidates were elected througliout the West Bank mu- 
nicipal councils. 

These people are currently under pressure by Israel either to submit, 
that is, to accept Israeli rule in modified form as part of the overall 
settlement, or be subjected to mass harassment and not being able to 
leave towns and not being able to collect money for municipal councils 
for civic services. 

For instance, the city of Ramallah, where I live, has had a deteriorat- 
ing situation in its educational services ( appointment of new teachers, 
et cetera) and in conducting daily services, because of difficulty in 
getting aid supplied by either private contributions, by Arabs abroad, 
or aid whidh these cities have been able to get through from friendly 
Arab governments. 

But the main brunt of this attack, of course, is direct. It is in the 
form of daily interrogation for various people who simply speak their 
minds. They may have signed a petition or participated in a vocal 
protest. All this without any formal charges. 

Sometimes it can be quite severe. It takes the form of torture. It 
takes the form of physical deportation. It takes the form of arrest 
without charges taking place for months and montlis and as in the 
case of the few people I mentioned. 

Senator Abourezk. Do you know about those who have been tor- 
tured bv the Israeli Government ? 

Mr. Tamari. Yes. 

Senator Abourezk. Who are they ? 

Mr. Tamari. I have talked with a particular person who is a former 
editor of a newspaper who has been tortured. 

Senator Abourezk. What were the circumstances surrounding that ? 

Mr. Tamari. He has been arrested in a village near Ramallah in, I 
believe, 1969— but I am not sure. It could be 1968. He was charged 
with conspiracy to commit armed acts of resistance. He has been 
interrogated and beaten up and tortured and charged finally, after 
confession, with a sentence of 5 years. He has since been released and 
is now still living in the West Bank. 


I have talked with several other people who have been tortured, 
including students of mine. I do not think I can say their names, 
but I will mention that this is something you are probably familiar 
with. The Sunday Times has issued an extensive report fully docu- 
menting this and it has been published in several other places. 

The Israeli Government has replied to this report, but so far has 
not produced concrete evidence to contradict the evidence put out by 
the Sunday Times. 

Senator Abourezk. Perhaps you do not know, but I will tell you 
that the London Sunday Times' story on torture got almost no cover- 
age in the United States. It was probably a consensus here by the 
American press that the story should not be repeated, apparently 
because it only received two or three sentences buried deep in another 
story in the Washington Post. I never saw it anywhere else. 

There was also a charge by a witness yesterday with regard to the 
settlements themselves that there is a great deal of racism involved 
in the settlements in the occupied territories and they are established 
only for Jews and that neither the Arabs nor anyone else could not 
move into the settlements or live in them. 

Do you know whether or not this is true ? 

Mr. Tamari. I would hardly call that a charge because the Israeli 
Government does not claim that these settlements are housing proj- 
ects for the Arab population. These are openly established settlements, 
many of them on confiscated land, for the clear purpose of settling 
Jewish immigrants and Israeli citizens, who are Jewish, and who 
are by definition not Arabs. 

Israeli citizens are categorized by the census of Jews and non- 
Jews, and these settlements are exclusively Jewish settlements which 
Arabs are allowed to build but are not allowed to settle in at all. 

In many cases many of the houses in these areas are left unoccupied 
despite the extreme housing shortage in the occupied territories — not 
only in those territories, but in Israel itself. For example, in the town 
of Upper Nazareth, which is an exclusively Jewish settlement, 
built on land confiscated from Arab citizens of Nazareth, which is 
experiencing an extreme housing shortage because it is limited by 
land expansion, housing has been built exclusively for Jewish immi- 
grants. More recently by some devious means, you might say, a few 
Arabs acquired and were granted some of these empty flats which 
are open for Jewish immigrants only. A big havoc was created in the 
Israeli press that Arabs have been renting houses in this exclusive 

This situation is much more severe in the occupied territories which 
is not legally Israeli and in which Arabs, by no means, can acquire 
residence in those Jewish settlements. 

There is another example from Kiryat Arba, which is a Jewish town 
built after 1968 in Hebron. This has been populated by religious 
zealots, many of them sympathizers of the extreme movement known 
as Gush Emunim. They have been harassing Arabs conducting their 
daily life activity in Hebron itself. They have claimed that they have 
certain rights to establish law and order in the host city which hosted 
them. Of course, they have not hosted them willingly, but this is what 


In that particular town there are a few small factories which the 
Jewish settlers do not have enough labor to employ. So what happened 
is that they are employing Arab labor to create commodities for a 
town ostensibly built for Jewish settlers, but in which the Jews who 
are there are apparently not capable of filling all the jobs created. 

So, Arabs are accepted as laborers, cheap labor, I would say, but 
are definitely accepted as neighbors or potential residents within the 
settlements which are exclusively for Jewish people. 

Senator Abourezk. The witness yesterday who testified for the 
Israeli position, Mr. Yehuda Blum, talked about deportations. He said 
that everyone who had been deported was a Jordanian citizen and in 
all but three cases these people were deported to Jordan. He saw noth- 
ing wrong with taking people out of their homes and deporting them to 
their own country. 

I wonder if you might comment on that observation. 

Mr. Tamari. I think this is a form of double talk which has per- 
meated the Arab-Israeli conflict. You can put a label on a person and 
use that label to rationalize whatever you do to that person. There is 
no such thing as Palestinian citizenship at the moment. All Palestin- 
ians happen to be citizens of one country or another. In fact, we have 
become citizens of over 100 countries precisely because of the results of 
the establisliment of the Jewish state in 1948. 

Jordan has been one of the few countries which has given its 
citizenship to Pailestinians in 1948. So, we are legally Jordanian citi- 
zens. Every citizen of the West Bank, every Palestinian, is a Jordanian 
citizen by naturalization. This is the country which has annexed — 
and I use the word annexed — in 1948 and whose majority population 
is Palestinian. 

To use that fact to say that Palestinians on the West Bank are 
Jordanian and therefore when they are deported they are sent to their 
own country, I think, is a very sick kind of rationalization. 

It would be equivalent to saying that a country in the West which 
ships back Jewish immigrants, for instance, the United States or 
England — both are countries that have received many victims of 
fascism after the Second World War — saying that they were former 
inhabitants of Russia or what have you, or Poland, et cetera, I think 
it would create a very great protest, and justly so, by people who 
consider themselves democrats. 

Senator Abourezk. Would you use the same rationale just to show 
how outrageous that kind of contention is? American Jews are also 
citizens of Israel under the law. If someone were to pass a regulation 
saying that all American Jews should be deported to Israel, and there 
is nothing wrong with sending them to their country of nationality, 
then I guess that would point up how ridiculous the argument is. 

Mr. Tamari. Yes. 

We feel strongly about this point. Daily we see foreign immigrants 
coming in to take our land and our homes. Walking in Jerusalem and 
seeing people coming from all over the world, especially from Europe 
and the United States, and taking the attitude that this countiy is 
theirs imder conditions which the inhabitants of that country, the 
Palestinians, are daily being deported and denied their human rights. 

It is a humiliating experience for us. 


Black humor is usually developed toward these people. But this 
is the only way to tolerate it. It is an intolerable situation. 

Basically the cruelty of it is the audacity of many of these immi- 
grants who see themselves both as Americans and Israelis without 
taking into accounts the rights of the indigenous population of these 

Senator Abourezk. I have one more question. 

Do you expect a retaliation by the Israeli authorities when you 
return to the West Bank, tliat is, because of your testimony here? 

Mr. Tamari. Retaliation against me, do you mean ? 

Senator Abourezk. Yes. 

Mr. Tamari. Well, we all expect some kind of repression when we 
stick our necks out. These acts are performed in various degrees. I do 
not know what will happen to me. 

However, some of us are more fortunate than others. For instance, 
some of us by having access to the foreign press and by appearing in 
such august bodies as yours, do have some protection by virtue of the 
dependency of Israel on the United States for its support. Our hope is 
precisely here, that is, that this dependency can be used as pressure 
in order to force Israel to make concessions to the Palestinian popula- 
tion. These are human rights which are theirs by virtue of having 
lived there for thousands of years. 

I cannot answer your question because I do not know what will hap- 
pen. However, what will happen to me would be very small indeed in 
relationship to what happens to those people who have no access to 
ways of seeking help. Most of these people are being imprisoned in 
their own country. If they leave, they can only leave on the condition 
of not returning to their homes. 

As an example, quite often prisoners who are serving sentences for 
very small things, like demonstrations or distribution of leaflets are 
allowed to leave the country and escape their prison sentences under 
the condition that they do not return. These are the people who really 

Whatever happens to me in comparison to them is very, very minor. 

Senator Abourezk. I think we have no more questions. 

I want to express my thanks and the thanks of the subcommittee for 
your appearance here and your testimony. We appreciate it very much. 
It has been an excellent contribution to the overall hearings. I want to 
wish you good luck on your return. 

Mr. Tamari. Thank you. 

Senator Abourezk. Our next witness is Dr. Ibrahim Dakkak. He is 
an engineer by profession and a resident of Jerusalem and who has 
specialized in research on the status of Jerusalem and the effects of 
Israeli occupation on Arabs living on the West Bank. 

We want to welcome you to the subcommittee hearings. You may 


Mr. Dakkak. Thank you. Senator Abourezk, for the invitation. I 
thank you for allowing me to express my views about Jerusalem and 
the West Bank. 


I have few points to add to what has been said already. I approve of 
what my colleague, Mr. Tamari, said and consider all of his comments 
correct and in their places. 

I take the problem as the chairman of the engineers association 
in the West Bank and as the engineer in charge of the restoration of 
the Aksa Mosque. 

In the first case we have had grave experiences as far as the profes- 
sion itself is concerned. The economic situation which resulted after 
1967, which was, in most cases, a recession in the Arab economy, forced 
many of the engineers and skilled laborers to leave the country and 
seek work outside. In many other cases some of the laborers had to go to 
the Israeli side to help establish new homes for the newcomers who 
were taking the place of their brethren who left the country after 

I have another point concerning that side of the problem. We had 
two colleagues who were in prison for no reason given by the authori- 
ties. One of them is the late Husni-Haddad, an engineer, who spent 22 
months in prison. Then he was deported to Jordan. 

The second one is Mohammed Abbas Abdul Hakk from Nablus who 
was detained for 29 months in prison for no reason known to anybody. 
He was released lately. 

His brother as well, who is an engineer, was deported from Nablus. 
He is now living outside. 

This is as far as the engineering side is concerned. Also from that 
side I can see the deportation of some of my colleagues in the profes- 
sional associations complex. One of them is Di'. Abdul Azziz Al Haii 
Ahmad and Dr. Tobasi, both of whom were chainnen of the associa- 
tion of the dentists in the West Bank at two different periods. 

I do not want to expand on that point. I would like to go to the other 
point now. 

I will talk about the part whose information I gathered during my 
work as the man in charge of the restoration of the Aksa Mosque. This 
work put me in daily contact with the problems of Jerusalem during 
the time I occupied that post. 

It comes to me sometimes that something new is coming on the hori- 
zon as the Israeli authorities have decided to equalize the services in 
the West Bank and Gaza Strip with that of Israel. 

This in itself has been done also in the case of Jerusalem when it was 
annexed to Israel. 

In the case of Jerusalem, the excuse given by the authorities was 
that the two sectors of Jerusalem would enjoy complete equality in re- 
spect to services, welfare, and education. That was reinforced by the 
Thalman report submitted to the Secretary General of the United 
Nations in 1967 which stated that the purpose, as declared by the Is- 
raelis, was to equalize the legal and administrative status of residents 
of these parts of the city which were not previously controlled by 
Israel with that of Israeli citizens. 

So, there is a great possibility that the step taken by the Israeli au- 
thorities to equalize the services in the West Bank and Gaza Strip 
would be a prelude to the complete annexation of the West Bank to 
Israel. The blessings of annexation as witnessed in Jerusalem showed 


up early in June 1967 when the Mogi'abi Quarter just adjacent to the 
Wailing Wall was completely swept away by bulldozers. That quarter 
contained historical schools and hospices and buildings. They were 
taken away without even recording them in the appropriate form. 

Also on the West Bank three villages, Emaus, Beit Nuba, and Yalo, 
were also taken away and nobody could know now where they were. 
In the place of the Mograbi Quarter a piazza was established for the 
Wailing Wall, and in the place of the villages, a settlement was estab- 
lished. The establishment of that settlement did not only occupy the 
lands of these three villages but it took also the fertile land which be- 
longed to the other villages neighboring these three villages. 

The inhabitants had to go either to the West Bank or they had to 
work on their own land as hired laborers. 

The annexation which the Israelis dislike to mention because they 
prefer to use the word "unification'' has gone on with the Jerusalemites 
seeing many of their places and much of their land being confiscated. 
It has been beyond any doubt that what has happened in Jerusalem 
was not a unification because until today's date there are two Jeru- 
salems. There is the Arab Jerusalem and there is the Jewish Jeru- 
salem. Until now everybody could see that the two cities are demo- 
graphically, socially, geographically, and physiologically two cities 
and not one city. 

The only unification which took place was the unification of the ad- 
ministration against the will of the Arabs. 

Israel from 1947 until now failed to find any unified society within 
its borders and nobody expects Israel to be a unified society in Jeru- 
salem. Many Israelis were encouraged to live in Arab Jerusalem after 
June 1967, but these could not live for a long time. 

The reasons for this are many, but the main reasons are the services 
given by the authorities to the Arab part of Jerusalem. They are 
inferior to those given to the resident of the Jewish side of the city. 

From 1947 until now, not a single neighborhood in Jerusalem or 
Israel was built as a mixed neighborhood for both Arabs and Jews. 
Not a kibbutz was established as a mixed kibbutz. In other words, 
what has happened so far in Jerusalem was the subjection of the will 
of the people there to the will of the Israelis in as far as annexation 
is concerned. 

Therefore, an Israel design of unification in the West Bank and 
Gaza Strip would take the same form as in Jerusalem. 

The need of the Israelis to annex Jerusalem stems from their attempt 
to justify the religious Biblical vision which frames the Zionist ide- 
ology. In fact, it is prompted by the desire of the Israeli leadership to 
divert the attention of the Israelis from their daily social plight to 
other goals and means. 

The Arabs of Jerusalem feel that they have their full right to see 
the future of Jerusalem in an Arab perspective. They are justified as 
well in their refusal to see it through an Israeli eye. The overall 
Israel attitude has kept Jerusalem demographically, socially, and even 
geographically divided in spite of all the Israel efforts. 

The Arabs, in their defense of their identity and the Arab character 
of their city and their property and their holy places and their culture 


are at loggerheads with the Israel authorities. They have developed 
the feeling that the challenge is human and universal. They believe 
rightly that it is the duty of humanity to stand to their side. 

After the annexation of Jenisalem, the authorities turned to the 
practical issue ; that is, the Judaization of the city. Tlie firet step was 
to set up commissions to draw the new Jerusalem planning scheme. In 
1968 the Prime Minister, Mr. Eschkol, declared that the historical 
right of the people of Israel will have to be taken into account and that 
Israel would, on the other hand, be unable to ignore the concentration 
of Arab populations in certain areas. 

The official planning scheme for Jerusalem was not known when 
its blessings showed up very quickly in the form of land expropriation 
in the new and old city of Jerusalem. The steps which follow explain 
the general characteristics of the planning scheme to be applied in 
the city. 

Some aspects of these characteristics were conveyed to the public 
through the local press, other publications, and building activities. The 
following points explain the general aims of the scheme. 

In the old city of Jerusalem the Israelis expropriated 116 dunams — 
every four dunams make 1 acre. The plan called for the expulsion of 
10,000 Arabs from the old city of Jerusalem and at the same time 
called for the housing of 5,000 Jews there. The quaiter was taken over 
completely on the one hand and the Arab areas outside the city wall 
were classified into three categories on the other hand; archeological 
sites where building was not allowed, green areas where no construc- 
tion was allowed, and special areas subject to special regulations which 
limit building activity. 

Most of the Land left outside these zones was exappropriated. This 
exappropriated land exceed 20,000 dunams used completely for the 
building of new Jewish neighborhoods and satellites, namely, Ramat 
Eschkol, Maalot, Dafna, Nevi Yacoub, Gilo Ramat (Nabi-Samuel) 
and East Tellpiot. 

Senater Abourezk. Are Arabs pennitted to move into these particu- 
lar satellite settlements ? 

Mr, Dakkak. As I said before, these were exclusively built for the 
Jews, and unitil now, from 1947 to 1977, no Arab was allowed to buy 
any flat in any Jewish neighborhood. 

Senator Abourezk. That is still the case today ? 

Mr. Dakkak. Until now, it is still standing, yes. 

The future plan for the rest of the Arab land in the area of 
Jerusalem and its environs are not yet officially revealed, but informa- 
tion leaked in the local press revealed the following. 

Seventy thousand dunams to the east of Jerusalem were announced 
to be a restricted area by military order. On this land the Maale 
Adomim ( Al Klian al Ahmar) Cejiter was established and new Jewish 
settlements were suggested by the plan to be built around the city of 
Jerusalem. Three of the settlements and four villages are suggested 
to accommodate between 75,000 to 150,000 inhabitants. Five other 
satellites are to accommodate 25,000 inhabitants. The location for these 
settlements is suggested to be to the north and northwest of Ramallah 
Al Khan al Ahmar mentioned before. 


Ten thousand dwelling schemes is under consideration. It was 
reported that extra 10,000 other dwellings are to be built by the year 
1982. ^ . , 

By the end of the decade there should be close to 40,000 Jewisli 
families living beyond the former ai-mistice line, that is, moved to 
the Arab part of Jerusalem. 

The aim of tliis pursuit is to keep tlie Arab population in Jerusalem 
within the one-third minority limit. This policy was maintained and 
the execution of it was facilitated by the open bridge policy. This 
policy acted as the release valve for tlie jobless and the homeless and 
effectively decreased the resistance of the population against Israeli 

The one-third/two-thirds policy logically called for the same per- 
centage of construction activity for botli groups, but it was never 
followed by the Israeli administration. The Israeli plan called for 
the building of 68,000 extra rooms for the Arabs by the year 1982 and 
250,000 rooms for the Jews, based on an occupancy rate of 1.2 persons 
per room for the Jews against 1.6 persons per room for the Arabs. 

If we cx>nvert the 68,000 rooms to housing units that should have 
been built until 1976, that would have come to 7,400 units. During 
the same period, up till 1976, only 1,000 residential units were estab- 
lished in the Arab sector of Jerusalem, either in the form of simple 
units or as extensive additions to existing housing. 

In other words, the Arab housing program as envisaged by the 
planning authority, lagged by more than 6,000 units- 

On the other hand, it is a well-known fact in Jerusalem that many 
residential units in the Jewish neighborhood were built on exappro- 
priated Arab land found no Jews to occupy them. These were left to 
accommodate potential newcomers. 

The Israel drive toward giving Jerusalem a dominant Jewish 
character touched extrasensitive points ; namely, Al Haram al-Sharif . 
The problem of the property of this holy sanctuary was given promi- 
nence upon the challenge of the Israelis to the Moslem authority. The 
Moslems, from the beginning of the Zionist movement, have been 
deeply suspicious of Jewish intentions. They always feared that the 
Jews ultimately aimed at the seizure of the Al Haram al-Sharif and 
the destruction of the Islamic sanctuary. 

Although this was denied by the Israelis, time and again, there were Jewish 
writers, scholars, and visionaries who gave substance to such suspicions. 

I am quoting Walter Zinder, who is a Jew. 

Moreover, in June 1967, within hours of the conquest of the Old City, the chief 
rabbi of tJbe Israeli army, Goren, with some of his followers, entered the area 
and conducted Jewish prayers in the Al Haram. A few weeks later he suggested 
erecting a synagogue on the esplanade of Al Aksa Mosque. 

In addition, in August 1969, 4 days before the fire in Al Aksa Mosque, a group 
of the Jewish national youth (Bitar), against the protest of the Moslem oflBcials, 
held a ceremonial parade near the Dome of the Rock where their leader in his 
address complained that the temple mount was still held by aliens and called 
for the rebuilding of the third temple. 

The rebuilding of the third temple means the destruction of Al Aksa 
Mosque which is part of Al Haram al-Sharif. 


Moreover, in September 1967, the Defense Minister confiscated the 
keys of the Mograbi Gale, thus depriving the Moslems of their long- 
established right to sole control of the entrances in the areas of the Al 
Haram al-Sharif. This reflected a deep concern and suspicion that the 
Haram could be desecrated and probably subjected to sinister designs. 
This feeling was further reinforced by the burning of Al Aksa Mosque 
on August 21, 1969. 

Although the authorities were able to prove that the gutting was 
made by a Christian from Australia and not by a Jew, the investiga- 
tion committee set up by the Moslem council shed doubt on the official 

The committee which was composed of engineers reported that the 
fire started in more than one locality at the same time which implied 
that more than one person was involved. The appeal of 13 Jews in 
April 1969, 4 months before the fire in mosque, to the hi^h court of 
justice was considered a prelude to the Israel designs agamst the Al 
Haram al-Sharif. 

The order asked the minister to give cause why he should not insure 
that suitable protection be given by the Israeli police to prevent the 
applicants' prayer from being disturbed and to show reason why 
instruction should not be given to Israel police personnel to refrain 
from interfering with the applicants' prayer. 

A few weeks ago it was declared that the same Rabbi Goren was 
going to publish a map showing the places where Jews could pray on 
the Al-Haram al-Sharif which is the Moslem sanctuary. The rejec- 
tion of the high court to the request was based on the remarks of the 
attorney general which agreed with the views expressed by the Min- 
ister of Religious Affairs in the Ivnesset which stated that there is 
nothing in the law which forbids the gathering of Jews from visiting 
the temple mount and praying there. 

He added, "However, the implementation of this right depends on 
the maintenance of public order and this was within the jurisdiction 
of the Minister of Police." 

The attorney general in his report assessed the problem as political 
and not judicial. 

This decision which was taken by the Israel officers practically 
legalized the Jewish claim to the property of Al Haram al-Sharif. 
This created tension in the city itself between the Moslems and the 
Arabs on the one hand and the Jews on the other hand. 

A similar experience occurred in the west bank area when the 
Jews were allowed to pray in the Ibrahimi JNIosque in Hebix>n. 

Another problem faced by the Arabs in Jerusalem was that, upon 
the occupation of Jerusalem, the officials of the Israel Ministry of 
Religious Affaii-s wanted to impose the Israeli laws on the Sharia 
legal system of East Jerusalem, and more the ministry wanted to take 
over the control of the Wakf property, which is a JSIoslem endowment. 
The Israelis considered tliat the Sharia (Moslem religious law) and 
the qadis (judges) did not renounce the Jordanian citizenship and 
did not swear allegiance to the President of Israel. 

The reaction of the Moslem leadership came in the form of FATWA 
which objected to the interference of Israel into Moslem religious 


The Israelis also stopped at no limit to force their will and create 
conditions suitable for their purposes. One of their activities which 
caused concern to the Arabs and the world at large was the archeo- 
logical excavations conducted around the Al-Haram al-Sharif. Two 
digs were started, one under the supervision of Prof. Benjamin Mazar 
of the Hebrew University and the other under the supei"vision of the 
Minister of Religious Affairs. 

Senator Abotjrezk. Excuse me. Do you have testimony on the effect 
of the occupation on Arabs living in the west bank ? 

Mr. Dakkak. By presenting what I am presenting, I meant that 
this will happen sooner or later on the west bank if Israel designs 
continue like this. 

The effect, of course, on the west bank on the Israeli is immeasurable 
in the form of the amount of recession wliich has taken place in the 
economy and the effect, that is, the harm which was inflicted on the 
health and educational systems and also the cause for people to leave 
the country and go outside. 

The main thing that one would feel and see was that — because of 
the deterioration in these fields, a great many people turned from own- 
ers of land to workers in the Israeli enterprises, whether agricultural 
or industrial. 

If I look to the problem of health, for example, which is deteriorat- 
ing very much under governmental control I find that the private 
efforts of individuals and groups in the west bank is taking the greater 
load of that. 

We have a shortage of technical personnel who can handle this 

My colleague before me, Mr. Tamari, has shown how great the effect 
was and I add to that that the ultimate result of the Israeli designs 
is that the Arabs in the west bank will end up by being a mobile labor 
force in the area without having any relationship to the land. 

In other words, they are losing their property. They are losing the 
control of their destiny. They are losing their culture which has been 
very much hampered by the Israeli activities. 

I repeat again that what is happening in Jerusalem is a small picture 
of what might happen in the west Ijank. I was talking about the 
excavations in Jerusalem. I mentioned that there were two excava- 
tions. One of them was in the southern part of the Al Haram area 
which was conducted by Benjamin Mazar of the Hebrew University. 
There is a danger that this excavation might tempt the Israelis to 
claim that all the walls of Al Haram Al-Sharif are part of the Wail- 
ing Wall. In other words, the whole area would be turned to a religious 
domain controlled by the religious authorities and any Arab who 
would like to go inside to pray would be controlled by this authority. 

The other dig which was staited by Rabbi Perla and under the 
supervision of Rabbi Perla from the Ministry of Religious Affairs, 
was in the form of a tunnel under historical buildings of the Mamluki 
period. The tunnel, which was visited many times by myself, is 2 to 
3 meters wide, dug through the soil bearing the foundation of the 
Islamic historical buildings on top of it. 

One side of it exposes the Herodian Wall and the other side was 
supported by timber for some time. The meager supervision of the 


Ministry of Religious Aflfairs on this dig is a cause for more suspicion 
and worry for the Moslems, especially if we consider tlie intiuence 
held by the chief rabbis over this ministry and its personnel. 

At least three important buildings were very much cracked because 
of that tunneling. One of them was built in the 13th century. The 
other was built in the 15th century and there was also another one 
built in the 15th century. 

These acts were condemned by UNESCO and by many other bodies, 
outside and inside among them the Arab institutions in the west bank, 
but until now nobody is sure that the work has stopped. 

Again about the Old City of Jerusalem, I repeat again, that the 
Jewish quarter, which has been confiscated completely from the Arabs 
will now be extended. The expansion of that will be at the expense of 
the Arabs and extra people over and above the 10,000 which were 
expelled already from the Old City of Jerusalem will go out. 

Their chances to find a place to live in/outside the city walls are verj' 
small because land is scarce there. On top of that there are regulations, 
or at least methods used by the authorities to postpone or to find 
excuses to postpone the building activity of the Arabs in that area. 

Also, the cost of building in the Arab area is becoming very, very 
high and the Arabs are unable to meet it because the area left is so 
small and the competition is high, which makes the cost of the land 
go higher. 

No projects were conducted by either side to solve that problem, 
so the only solution for these people is either to go to the west bank 
and thus increase the housing problems in the west bank, or they go 
to the east bank across the River Jordan where they might find some 
refuge and work. 

These are some of the points which I would like to mention. I even 
know of cases where I myself was involved in the Old City of Jeru- 
salem where we had a house. That was supposed to be confiscated by 
the authorities — under the pretext that that house was in bad condi- 
tion. When I visited that house, which belonged to my family, I found 
that the house was in good condition. But the aim was just to throw 
the people outside who were part of my family. 

We had to resort to courts and other means to stop that. But so far 
we are no sure that we can keep that house. 

The problems in the west bank and Gaza, if Israel continues this 
policy will be great. The fruits have shown up. 

One of them is the restriction of water for irrigation in Gaza and 
the Jordan Valley. Very lately the Israelis have resorted to con- 
trolling the amount of water given to the Arab land for irrigation. 
Meters were installed on wells which w^ere dug by the Arabs in their 
land in order to control the amount of water used for irrigating Arab 

This, of course, will lead to the decrease in the agricultural produc- 
tion and ultimately the land used will be smaller. In that case, the 
neighboring settlements, which were established by the Israelis, will 
be taking advantage of that. 

Another problem which we have faced also on the west bank was 
electricity and the promotion of electrical power. For instance, in 


Na/blus, the municipality has been working very hard to convince the 
authorities that they should be allowed to import electrical generators 
to increase the power used in that area. 

Until now the authorities have refused, and suggested that it might 
be better and fit to connect the Nablus area with the national grid in 
Israel and thus annex the area electrically. 

A third thing which has been observed on the West Bank and Gaza 
is that the forests wliich were grown up for so many years were dried 
out by the authorities. The reason for that is that the forests by stay- 
ing on the West Bank would cause part of the water which comes in 
the form of rain to stay in the ground. But if these dry out, the water 
will enrich the aquifers which supply the main water system of Israel. 

The West Bank is being impoverished at the expense of supplying 
water to the Israelis. The problems in the West Bank and Gaza which 
are faced in the agricultural sector, are the marketing problems. 
People are finding problems in marketing their products. The products 
have been either marketed by Israeli establishments which dictate con- 
ditions which fit their own interests, or the product is allowed to be 
marketed outside in the east bank of Jordan. 

In other words, the economy of the West Bank and Gaza strip is 
being connected directly to the economy outside the borders. In case 
the bridges were closed, the economy would be affected very badly. 

The municipalities are shouldering great responsibilities in the ab- 
sence of a national rule in the West Bank. They are finding great 
difficulties in shouldering these responsibilities. I know lately of prob- 
lems which happened in Ramallah, for example, that the commander 
general of the West Bank started to negotiate with people about water 
supply to the city with people who had no relationship with that 

For example, with the director of education and with other notables, 
and neglecting the municipal council and water authority. He refused 
to contact them. 

He meant to create an alternative leadership in the area. 

Because the mayor of Ramallah stood against the occupation, he 
found great difficulties in going out of the country to attend a seminar 
in London. Very lately, he was given the permission, but at the same 
time he received news that his brother, who is a medical doctor grad- 
uated from the United States was being asked not to stay in the area 
because his residency permit expired and there was no intention to 
extend it. 

The area is in great need of his services and the services of many 
others. Services in general are deteriorating very badly. They claim 
there is a need to equalize the services but it is not meant to raise the 
standard of services as much as a prelude to the total annexation of 
the area. 

Thank you. 

Senator Abourezk. Thank you very much for your testimony. We 
appreciate your appearance here today. 

Mr. Dakkak. May I submit these documents? 

Senator Abourezk. Yes; we will insert them in the record at this 

[Material follows :] 



and Repression in Israel 
and The Occupied Territories 

A translation from the French of a brochure published by the Comtte's de Soutien au peuple Palestimen in Switzerland 
by the Lebanese Association for Information on Palestine, March 1975. 





To the Israeli & World Public Opinion 

On January 28, 1974 we asked you to protest against 
the oppression prevailing in the occupied territories. 
In this appeal we mentioned the names of five men 
who were arrested in Nablus (West Bank) and who 
have since then "disappeared". 

Two of them, Wajdi Kamhawi and Bassam Abdul 
Razzak Amira, were "found" on February 13, 1974 
by their families and lawyer, Mrs. Felicia Langer. 
Hereunder is the account they gave to their lawyer 
and families— in the presence of witnesses— of what 
happened to them from the moment of their arrest. 

Wajdi Kamhawi declared that he had been arrested 
and locked in the jail of Jenin. There, his interro- 
gators beat him and spit in his mouth (the pseudonyms 
of these "investigators ' were "Abu Ali" and Abu El 
Ras"). Wajdi denied all the accusauons he was 
charged with and offered to present an alibi. Four 
days later, without further interrogation, he was 
transferred to an unknown prison inside Israel. There 
his interrogation started again. He was stripped 
naked and the same policemen who had quesuoned 
him earlier threw cold water at him. He was forced 
to drink salt water and was beaten. This treatment 
was repeated— at intervals— for four days, after which 
on January 22, 1974 he was sent back to the Jenin 
prison. From then on he was no longer ill-treated. 

Bassam Abdul Razzak Amira, who is now detained 
in jail at Hebron, declared that he had at first been 
held in the Jenin prison where investigators— whose 
names he does not mention— beat him and pushed 
a slick down his mouth. They then undressed him 
completely and poured cold water all over him, fol- 
lowing which he was handcuffed and a suck was 
twisted through the handcuffs. He was able to show 
his lawyer wounds and scars on both hands. The 
authorities later transferred him to an unknown prison 
inside Israel, where he was placed naked under a 
cold shower, every half hour. He was forced to drink 
salt water and was only allowed a very small quantity 
of drinking water. Every now and then, instead of 
the cold shower, his investigators would cover his 
body with snow. Shortly after he was transferred 
back to the Jenin prison, then to Ramallah and 
finally to Hebron. The night of this last transfer, he 
was ordered to take off his shirt and shoes and stand 
naked— for about an hour— under the snow in the 
prison courtyard. From there, he was taken to the 
interrogation room and his interrogators— about 
five— proceeded to slap him, asking him which slap 

hurt the most. He was then beaten on his handi and 
all over his body. His legs were swollen from the cold 
and the beating and he could no longer walk. He was 
placed in a cell for eight days after which the quadon- 
ing started all over again. He was forced to sit on a 
chair with his hands tied behind his back resting on 
the seat of another chair. While in this posidon one 
of the Interrogators kicked him in the stomach and 
another put his shoe in his mouth. Bassam Abdul 
Razzak Amira begged for mercy in the name of his 
children and the name of God. They replied Uughing 
that there was no God in that place. During this whole 
period and until February 13, 1974, he was unable 
to walk because of the wounds on his legs. He was 
put in solitary confinement and was not allowed to 
either wash or change his clothes. 

We wish to point out that in spite of the ill-treatment 
they were subjected to, neither Wajdi Kiunhawi nor 
Bassam Abdul Razzak Amira admitted to any ol the 
charges they were accused of and would not sign 
confessions presented to them. 

In the meantime two other men disappeared, 

Joseph Nasser of Jerusalem, owner and editor of 

Alfajer newspaper, and Abdallah Abu Siriani of 

Nablus. The latter was arrested in a Nablus street on 

December 18, 1973. 

Again, we appeal to the Israeli public opinion and 
that of the whole world to protest against such acts 
which are both arbitrary and in violation of Human 

We would like to request you to make your protests 
public and to address them to the person in the Israeli 
government who is in charge of the occupied terri- 
tories, Mr. Moshe Dayan, Minister of Defence. 

We also urge you to send these protests to the 
United Nations Secretary-General, Mr. Kurt Wald- 


For many years Je%vish personalities have been 
denouncing the daily practices which the occupying 
authorities try to camouflage. FeUcia Langer, a 
lawyer, made a testimony in which she said: 

"The Israelis maintain the same martial law which 
was imposed by the British. Since the occupation of 
Palestine, military courts function daily. According 
to the Israeli newspaper Maarw of May 13, 1971 in 
Gaza alone 5620 Palestinians have appeared before 
these tribunals between April 1970 and April 1971. 
Among these, 27 have been condemned to life im- 
prisonment and penal fines have exceeded 300,000 
Israeli pounds." 


Morr rfcently, the Tima of Augmt 24, 1974 af- 
finncd that sincr the beginning of April 1974, 896 
Palestinians from the occupied terrilories were ar- 
rested and imprisoned. 

Felicia Langer: 

"Who then are the people who fill the prisons? 
They include old people over 80 and children under 
13 years. 

"VVhat are their crimes? They either belong to a 
social organization or have participated in a peaceful 
demonstration, or distributed pamphlets. These peo- 
ple are accused of acts of terrorism (acts carried out 
in the defence of their country and their land). 

"Also treated as serious criminals are Palestinian 
refugees who have returned to join their families 
dispersed during the war. These are deported to 
Jordan after serving a prison sentence. 

"Since the l%7 war, 10,000 houses have been de- 
stroyed or razed after the explusion of their inhabitants ; 
this figure is not definitive, and it is pointless to de- 
scribe the destnicdon caused to the houses at Amwas, 
Beit Nuba, Yalo." 

The number of destroyed houses since 1%7 stands 
now at 19,000. 

Felicia Langer: 

"The justification of these explusions and dynamiting 
is foiind in the marual lavra of 1945, but the pretexts 
are often fragile — mere suspicion permits explusion 
and destrucdon. 

"Another measure consists if the appropriation 
of property, whether private or public, in order to 
*judaize' all the territories, and this is done in accor- 
dance with laws that were in force during the British 
Mandate. Under this law, the Arabs of Palestine 
have been deprived of a large portion of their land 
for 20 years. The law helps the designs of the occupa- 
tion authorities especially in Jerusalem and its out- 

"To replace the destroyed houses, large buildings 
are being erected to house Jewish families while the 
Arabs are compelled to find rcfiige in villages far from 
their place of work and very different from those 
they were bom in. 



President of the Israeli League for Human 

and Civil Ri^ts 

Israel Shahak, professor of Chemistry and president 
of the Israeli League foe Human and Civil Rights, was 
interviewed during his trip to Switzerland by the 
Palestinian Committee in Geneva. 

Q_: "What has led you to be concerned with the 
problem of political prisoners in Israel?" 

A : "My aim is to reveal to public opinion the con- 
ditions of political prisoners in Israel, whether Jewish 
or Arab, from the moment of their arrest to that of 
their indictment, not forgetting the tortures which 
are inflicted on them. It seems to me that this is 
essential to make people aware -of the problems posed 
by Zionism." 

(I: "What problems? How is the link made be- 
tween oppression and Zionism by public opinion m 


A: "One must not forget that Zionist oppression 
is applied to Jews as well as to Palestinians. However, 
the Israeli Jews are less vulnerable because the law 
gives them certain democratic guarantees which are 
denied to the Arabs. This explains the small propor- 
tion of Jewish political pristiners. Besides, I am myself 
accused of an offense against sute security for having 
been the guest of the Dutch Palestinian Committee. 
For public opinion this link between oppression and 
Zionism is not always evident. However, the cam- 
paigns dealing with the problem of political prisoners 
are very important in showing up Zionism, which 
is the basis of Israeli society As far as 1 am concerned, 
Israel is an apartheid society because it does not 
allow Palestinians to live in Israel. Israel claims to 
be a democratic society, it presents the kibbutz as a 
socialist institution and it seems to me it is very impor- 
tant to uncover this official propaganda line. It is im- 
portant to say that the kibbutz is an apartheid institu- 
tion for no Palestinian can become a member of it. In 
any case, the kibbutzim work collectively as employers 
of the Palestinians who work for them at a miserable 
salary. That is why 1 feel compelled to fight the idea 
of the socialist kibbutz. Can there be a socialism of 
apartheid? To this question the Zionists have no 
answer. Apartheid is also very clearly manifested 
with respect to the Palestinians in the ofcupied terri- 
tories. 1 would like to refer here to the problem of 
the dismemberment of families, provoked by a policy 
which prevents a member of a family who is living 
outside the occupied territories from returning to live 
with his relatives. This is the surest way to pressure 
Palestinian families out of the occupied territories if they 


want to live logcthei. It U a very sure psychological 
weapon especially when it is accompanied by the 
petrnission for Palestinians living ouside the occupied 
tcrritoiies to visit their families for six weeks in summer. 
These six weeks are terribly insufficient for a family 
separated tor a long time. The elfect would be to 
push the Palestmians to leave their land." 

Q,; "Do you have an estimate of the number of 
people who make these visits?" 

A: "Last summer there were 150,000 brothers, 
sisters, parents, cousins who had to leave afttr the 
allowed six weeks. This, therefore, is another aspect 
of the policy of apartheid. But the racist character 
of Zionism is appareiit at all levels of social life. It 
appears c\en in Israeli official sources; if, for example 
one refers to the annual statistics published by the state, 
one would notice two series of figures, those regarding 
'Jews' and those regarding 'Non-Jews'. Another 
striking example; the situation in the Gaza Strip. 
Gaza has the appearance of a concentration camp 
surrounded by barbed wire on all sides with guarded 

Q,.- "There are Arab workers in the Gaza Strip 
working in Israeli factories. How do they go from 
their place of residence to their place of work?" 

A : "These workers are transported to their factory 
under the surveillance of armed guards. They cannot 
leave the factory during the day, and if sometimes 
they stay for a week, they have to sleep in tents in the 

Q^: "Since your work is centered around the problem 
of political prisoners, can you describe to us oppres- 
sion in Israel?" 

A: "Oppression follows naturally from Zionism. 
Is is manifested in the large number of court case:j for 
offences against state security. All these court cases 
do not imply the use of violence or armed struggle ; 
to paint a slogan on a wall is regarded as an oflcnce 
against security; to possess a Palestinian flag is a crime 
of high treason. 1 had for instance to defend boys 
of 15 and 16 who were condemned to long periods 
of detention for having raised a Palestinian Mag in 
their school. With respect to the legal framework, 
these cases are based on confessions. If the prisoner 
does not confess he is finally released whether he 
is an Israeli or a foreigner, but if he comes from the 
occupied territories he is simply put under adminis- 
trative detention. It is a detention ordered by a simple 
military warrant. Thus an officer can sign a paper 
requesting the imprisonment of such or such a person 
in the interest of state security, and it is sufficient to 
detain that person." 

Q,.' "V'ou mentioned confessions, are these sponta- 
neous or extorted?" 

A : "Torture is often used in Israel but the most 
frequent cases occur in the occupied territories to 
incite people to confess. These confessions once signed 
by the prisoner can no longer be revoked. It is, by 
the way, infinitely more difficult for a lawyer to defend 
a prisoner who has signed a confession tlian it is to 
defend a person under administrauve detention. The 
only way to obtain these confessions is tlierefore by 
torture; I want you to know that the interrogation of 
Palestinians is always carried out when these men are 
naked. They arc beaten on tlie sensitive parts of their 
body, namely, their genital organs. The riext stage 
sometimes lasts very long. Usually it consists of locking 
the prisoner always naked in a solitary cell measuring 
Im x'2m and built of rough concrete with sharp 
edges. The prisoner is not even given a blanket. The 
third stage is reserved for the more hardened. It con- 
sists of tying their hands for long periods with elastic 
bands and then hanging them down either from the 
window bars or from the heavy steel door of the cell. 
Furthermore, there are what could be called the 
personal whims of the interrogators aimed at humili- 
ating the prisoner. The examples are many and 
varied : forcing them to walk on fours like an animal, 
shouting: 'I am a dog', ordering them to stand 
naked on one leg for lengthy periods, etc . . " 

Q_: "What has, according to you, triggered these 
waves of oppressive practices?" 

A : "First of all, one must understand the fate of 
the Palestinians in the occupied territories who have 
come to realize more and more that after seven years 
of existence under such conditions, there is no future. 
It is therefore natural that in such situations, political 
resistance is organized, followed by waves of repres- 
sion. So everything is tied to the general political 
situation. The wave of repression was especially 
aimed against the left, because it has created an organi- 
zation called 'The National Palestinian Front' which 
was able to organize an effective resistance movement ; 
strikes, demonstrations, etc.. In the occupied terri- 
tories, the Palestinians know that they have only one 
way left open to them, struggle, because the life they 
lead is worse th«m the one they had led in Jordan in 
the sense that Hussein did not ban their foUUore or 
poetry, nor did he send inspectors to their schools 
with the aim of abolishing from the programmes any 
mention of Palestine and Palestinian nationality, nor 
did he prevent families from uniting, even though he 
is a major enemy of the Palestinian people." 

20-488 O - 78 


Q,; "Your conclusion?" 

A : "Zionism prospera only because it hides the truth 
behind lake clichts, behind a veritable myth. Your 
duty oonsequendy, as well oun, is to destroy this 
myth and unveil the truth about Israel." 

World Peace Council 

At the beginning of June 1974 the Israeli League for 
Human and Civil Rights published the following 
advertisment in several newspapers: 

"On April 22, a wave of arrests was carried out in 
the eastern part of Jerusalem and on the West Bank 
of Jordan. Among those arrested were public person- 
alities, workers, syndicate leaders students, all well 
known in Palesdnian circles . . . For a long time the 
authorities refused to allow their families and lawyers 
to visit them. However, by order of the Israeli courts. 

some of them were allowed to receive visitors. The 
pri.V)ners were able to inform their lawyers and relatives 
of the brutal forms of torture to which they were 
subjected. Citizens of Israel, you must react." 

The League also distributed a report on the tortures 
which were reproduced in several Israeli liberal news- 
papers, namely ^o Haderekh and al-lltHuid. 


Last June 3, lawyers Hanna Naquara and Ali 
Rafi met with three prisoners of the Nablus prison in 
the presence of security forces: Mr. Mohamed 
Hijazi, 38, married, three children, member of the 
sydnicate leadership of the West Bank ; Mr. Mohamed 
Abbas Abdoul Haq, 37, married, three children, 
engineer employed by the Nablus municipality; and 
Mr. Jamal Voussef Freitekh, 44, married three chil- 
dren, construction worker. According to their lawyers, 
the prisoners had suffered the following treatment: 


Methods of inttrrogatum in Israeli prisons. 



Soon after his arrest, he was taken to the Nablus 
headquarters where Israeli policemen beat him all 
over, aiming particularly at his genital organs. This 
treatment lasted for three days, after which he was 
transferred to Ramallah. Immediately after his ar- 
rival, the prison guards hung him from the ceiling and 
beat him up. When he lost consciousness, they would 
awaken him with cold water. His interrogators 
admitted "having killed Farid Altachtouch" (a Pales- 
tinian patriot who died in an Israeli prison) and that 
"they were ready to kill him too if he refused to con- 
fess. . . they could liquidate him, make him go mad 
or deport him to Jordan." 

Later, he was taken in a police car to the prison 
of Jerusalem. . . handcuffed with a bag over his head 
so that he could hardly breathe. The Israeli soldiers 
ill-treated him during the whole trip. In the prison 
of al-Maskoubyah, the treatment was harder. He 
was locked in a cell with the "civil ofTenders" who took 
advantage of the slightest pause from torture to place 
lit cigarettes between his toes. A few days later, he 
was returned to the Nablus prison and was kept in 
solitary confinement until his transfer to the concentra- 
tion camp of Sarafand, where the most subtle forms of 
torture are practiced. He was locked in a minuscule 
cell, completely naked, and his bed was the floor 
covered with gravel. Sometimes his guards would 
order him to stand, handcufled, holding out a chair, 
and unable to protect himself from the terrible beatings 
they inflicted on him. He was sent back to the Nablus 
prison without an opportunity to consult his lawyers. 

Mohamad Abdul Hacj 

According to his lawyers, Mr. Abdul Haq was not 
treated any better. They saw the guards applying lit 
cigarettes to his skin. The prison administration 
refused to pro\'ide him with any medical treatment. 
Mr. Abdul Haq informed his lawyers that he was 
taken from the Nablus prison to a concentration 
camp where he had to crawl on stones as sharp as 
knife blades. To amuse themselves, the soldieis would 
ride him like a donkey and repeat endlessly: "You 
are a female ass, get down on all fours." Then he was 
hung down from the ceiling and beaten up. At present 
he is still in his cell handcuffed. 

Jamal Youssef FUEfrEKH 

According to his lawyers, Mr. Freitekh was subjected 
to similar treatment. 


On May 5, the lawyers, Felicia Langcr and Walid 
Al-Fahoum, were able to meet Hassan Abdul Majid 
Abu Kheir, a student who lives in Arab Jerusalem 
and who had been arrested on April 22. 

"Six days after his arrest, interrogations started. 
He was forced to drink two cups of concentrated salt 
after which the following words were exchanged 
between him and his interrogators: 'Confess that you 
are a communist and a member of the Palestinian 
National Front.' 

"'I am not a member of anything. I had not yet had 
the honour.'" 
"'Then undress'." 

The lawyers then describe the scene which followed : 
Hassan stood naked before his interrogators, who 
then hit him with a heavy truncheon on his genital 
organs. A piercing pain ran through Hassan who 
lost consciousness. The next day a new interrogation. 
He and his family were insulted and attempts were 
made to humiliate him in every way. He was ordered 
again to undress and was given the same horrible 
treatment as on the previous day. 

The same day, his lawyers saw the prisoner Omar 
Mohamed Oudeh, 24 years, student in Arab Jerusalem. 
He told them that as soon as he was arrested, and in 
five sessions of two hours each, he was beaten with a 
truncheon on his fingers and on the head; he was 
then forced to lie on the ground and a burning chemical 
substance was applied to his gepital organs. He was 
threatened with electroshocks, was kicked in the 
stomach, the liver, the back, he was made to jump up 
and down continuously for long hours. The men who 
questioned him wanted him to give them information 
about his cousin, Yacoub al-Ibeidi, and his brother 
Abdul Rahman, whom they knew nothing about 
but who were suspected of belonging to the Palestiruan 
resistance by the occupation authorities. He was 
accused of being a member of an organization engaged 
in the struggle against the occupation. The lawyers 
added thai they met him six days after his arrest and 
that the tortures seemed to have left him very ill. 

Felicia Langer requested to see prisoner Khadijah 
Abou Arkoub, a 27 year-old widow from Doora near 
Hebron, who had been arrested in January 1974 
without apparent charge. The prison authorities told 
her they did not have a prisoner by that name. And 
it was only after protesting vehemently that she was 
able to see her on June 13. This is what Mrs, Langer 

"It was only after pretending that I was going to 
ask for her release on bail that I was able to see her. 
She was brought before a judge and only at that n»o- 


mcnt was I able to exchange a few words with her. 
She showed me and the judge that her hair had been 
torn from the roots; she had kept them in a nylon bag; 
I tried to ofTcr this to the court as evidence of torture, 
but llie judge refused to react. After her release with 
no charges made against her, she was again arrested 
on suspicion of being a communist. I cannot reach 
her and no one will tell me in which prison she is being 


On May 29, following a large campaign of protests, 
lawyer Felicia Langer was able to see her client, 
Sleiman al-Najjib, 40, a political leader of the West 
Bank. She made the following comments about the 
meeting : 

"He was handcufTed and had obviously been se\'- 
erely tortured. Those who questioned him had tried 
to destroy him physically by every means. He told 
me that he was regularly beaten until he lost conscious- 
ness; he would be revived with cold water and then 
beaten again, including his genital organs. In addi- 
tion to the handcuffs, his legs were chained 24 hours 
a day. His torturers took turns in questioning him. 
Jie was also inflicted with the special torture treatment 
which was practiced in the concentration camp of 

— Ahmad Mohamed Samara was arrested on April 22, 
he was constantly beaten and has a broken nose. 

— Ayed Abdullah, 19, his genital organs and his nip- 
ples were pressed and squashed until they bled. 

— Adel Barghouti, the place of his arrest was kept secret 
for weeks after his arrest. When his lawyer, Mrs. 
Felicia Langer, finally met him he told her how his 
guards had brutally tortured him, beaten him, put 
him in solitary confinement, how he was given electo- 
shocks, was hung from the ceiling, and finally how he 
was prevented from sleeping 

— Ghassan Hacb was brutally hit on the head, the 
fingers and the genital organs, was awakened each 
time he fainted with ice water, and was kept in solitary 
confinement. His health deteriorated so much that 
his life was in danger. His wife, who recently saw him, 
has written to the International Red Cross asking 
them to intervene for his transfer to a hospital for 

— Abdallah al-Beirat, the prison administradon pre- 
tended not to know where he is, but the prisoners of the 
Ramallah prison have told their lawyers that he was 

kept in solitary confinement for two weeks, during 
which he was subjected to regular interrogations. 
He was brought to his cell unconscious and covered 
with blood. The prisoners added that al-Beirrat 
has become deaf due to repeated beating on the head 
and ears. 

Mohamed Shqueirat, whose lawyer Felicia Langer 
had on several occasions tried to see him, was told 
that he was held in Jerusalem. When she started the 
formalities in Jerusalem, she was told that he was in 
Ramallah. This went on for some time and she was 
unable to see him. Howev'er, several prisoners re- 
vealed to Mrs. Langer that Shqueirat was kept in 
solitary confinement, subjected to intensive question- 
ing and tortured daily. 


Walid al-Fahoum, a lawyer related that after a long 
delay imposed by the occupation authorities, he was 
able to meet his client, Husni Haddad. an engineer, 
at the prison of al-Maskoubyah in Jerusalem. (Mr. 
Haddad had been arrested on April 22 but his lawyer 
was only able to see him about three weeks later) . He 
described to his lawyer the treatment he received 
from the moment of his arrest as lollows : 

"I was first kept in the Hebron prison then trans- 
ferred to an unknown place which I later knew was a 
military concentration camp, where I was forced to 
stand on one leg for a long time, holding out a heavy- 
chair. I was locked during the whole period in a 
small cell the floor of which was covered with gravel. 
My hands were always tied behind my back- The 
prison authorities regularly put lit cigarettes between 
the toes of my right foot. During the interrogation, a 
heavy black bag covered my head, preventing me from 
breathing normally." 

Walid Al-Fahoum, after much delay, was also 
allowed to see his client, Attalah al-Rashmawi 
(a worker from Beit Sahour). He relates that after 
his arrest on April 22, Attalah was first kept in the 
Hebron prison then transferred to Ramallah where 
he was interrogated for several days on end. 

Attalah remembers with horror what happened to 
him on May 3 : that day, he was beaten on his genital 
organs and head throughout the interrogation. From 
Ramallah he was transferred to the prison of al-Mas- 
koubyah in Jerusalem, then brought back to Hebron 

and finally incarcerated in a small cell in the Bassa 

prison in Bethlehem. 


On May 25, he was taken (o an unknown military 
concentration camp and interrogations were resumed. 
His guards took turns in torturing him day and night 
without respite. He was given the usual treatment; 
beatings, cell floors covered with rough stones, standing 
up on one leg, crawling, burning cigarettes between 
toes, etc . . . 

Mohamed Suleiman Atwan, 56, native of Arab 
Jerusalem, was arrested for the first time on April 
23, released and then arrested again a few weeks later. 
His interrogation on June 2 proceeded as follows: 
four men surrounded him and beat him up all over 
his body, especially his back and his genital organs, 
he was then forced to carry a chair on his head. He 
lost consciousness and when he woke up he was in 
the street. The next day he was called for an interro- 
gation. He immediately contacted his lawyer, Felicia 
Langer who saw the terrible condition he was in. A 
doctor examined him and diagnosed a hemorrhage 
in his testicles caused by the beating. He was im- 
mediately operated on. Admitted to a hospital in 
Arab Jerusalem, he was visited by an International 
Red Cross Representative on June 5. 


On May 14, an influential Israeli newspaper, Davar, 
known lor its close tics to the establishment, pub- 
lished a report on the arrests in the occupied territories 
stating that they were for "political reasons" and 
aimed particularly at the National Palestinian Front. 
Ii recognized that "the persons arrested had commit- 
ted no crime" except that of engaging in political 

On June 26, a communist deputy, Tawfiq Zayyad, 
made a speech in the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) 
in which he unmasked the real reasons behind this 
large wave of arrests. He said: 

"In this campaign, several well-known Palesunian 
leaders were arrested, among them were communists, 
patriots and liberals. Their only crime is opposition 
to Israeli occupation and upholding the right of the 
Arab Palestinian people to self-determination." 

On May 3, the Arab Israeli newspaper al-Iltihad 
published the following report with regard to the 
reasons underlying the arrests and tortures: 

"It is no secret that the new arrests are politically 
motivated, aimed at dismanding the popular politi- 
cal organizations in the occupied territories which 

form the National Palestinian Front It is not 

a coincidence that this campaign was launched a the 

Rounding up dtlaijues. 

time when the Front published its programme in the 
first issue of its newspaper, Palestine: opposition to 
Israeli occupation, refusal to return the West Bank 
to Jordan, recognition of the legitimate national 
rights of the Arab Palesunian people, i.e. the esublish- 
ment of their state on the territories which Israel 
must evacuate." 

In a protest memorandum sent to the Israeli gov- 
ernment, the jurists of Nazareth describe the arrests 
as "political terror directed against the National 
Palesunian Front and its members and aimed at 
preventing the true representatives of the Arab Pales- 
tinian people from participating in the Geneva Peace 
Conference. Its objective is also to prevent the estab- 
lishment of a Palestinian state in the territories that 
Israel must evacuate." 

From the above, the following conclusions can be 

1. The arrests are politically motivated. 

2. None of the persons arrested committed a crime. 

3. The victims ask for the withdrawal of Israel fhjm 
the occupied territories and the respect of the legitimate 
national rights of the Arab Palestinian people. 

4. The victims were and stiU are subjected to torttire. 



The Israeli authorities and the multi-facetted infor- 
mation media close to the ruling circles, have remained 
silent on all that is happening in the occupied terri- 
tories, particularly the arrests, the tortures and the 
persecutions. Sometimes an oflidal Journal or an 
Israeli daily publish some news items regarding the 
arrest of saboteurs, of the discovery by the police of 
"dangerous elements." But that is all. In the (ace 
of the present wave of arrests and terror the authorities 
have adopted the policy of complete silence. Only 
the prisoners' families, their lawyers and four com- 
munist deputies in the Israeli parliament have defied 
this conspiracy of silence, they have attempted in 
every way to expose the facts to Israel and vnorld 

The Israeli authorities who always contest the legiti- 
mate national rights of the Palestinian people, utilize 
the most ignoble means to drown the voices rising 
against their occupation and annexation of the oc- 
cupied territories. At the same time they try to present 
to the world a peaceful image of the occupied territories, 
enjoying the fruits of a "democratic and friendly 
occupation." They even exert tremendous pressure 
to hide, fit)m the Israeli public, the truth about what 
happens in these territories, by stirring up chauvinistic 
rcacdonary sentiments. This helps them to realize 
their schemes — the non-recognition of the existence 
of the Palestinian people and therefore of its legitimate 
nadonal rights: All this enables Israel to consolidate 
its occupation of the Arab territories. 

But this conspiracy of silence will not last long. 
Many sources in Israel and in the world are unveiling 
the facts every day through resolute and courageous 
actions by liberal and peaceful forces in Israel. 

On July 2, the communist bloc in the Israeli parlia- 
ment insisted on an open debate in parliament about 
the arrests and tortures in the occupied territories, 
and proposed that parliament request an immediate 
stop to torture and the release of all polidcal prisoners. 
They also requested that a committee composed of 
representatives of all parliamentary groupings be 
formed to study all the registered complaints pertain- 
ing to torturer A large majority of the deputies voted 
against this proposal and even refiised to discuss it. 
The presiding chairman of the session — a leading 
member of the extreme right group, the Likud, went 
as far as to threaten to register an ofiiciai complaint 
against the communist bloc for "violation of norms". 
The government in its reply to the proposal presented, 
admitted that arrests had taken place but refused to 
give additional details. 

The Israeli Court of Appeal denounced the behav- 
iour of the police and the Security Department for 
refijsing to reveal to the lawyers concerned the reasons 
tor the arrest of several people— Suleiman Najjab, 
Khalie Hijazi, Jamal Freitekh, Husni Haddad, 
Muhamed Abu Gharbyah, and others— and for forbid- 
ding their lawyers from exercising their functions. 
Lawyer Felicia Langer has registered a complaint to 
the Court of Justice requesting that a law be passed 
authorizing lav»7ers to see their clients. 

The two lawyers, Hanna Naquara and Ali Rafi 
have sent a telegram to the United Nations Secretary- 
General, DrT Kurt Waldheim, during his tour of the 
Middle East in June, requesting the intervention of 
the international organization to put an end to the 
torture of political prisoners. 

The Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights 
held a press conference on June 18, in which Pro- 
fessor Israel Shahak, President of the League, and the 
lawyers Felicia Langer, Hanna Naquara and Ali 
Rail spoke about the prisoners and the tortures to 
which they were subjected. They accused the Israeli 
authorities of violating the Gene\'a Conventions. 

A letter signed by over 100 mothers and wives was 
sent to the President of the United Stales, Richard 
Nixon, during his recent visit to Israel, in which 
they requested his personal intervention for the libera- 
tion of their husbands and sons. The letter mentioned 
that the prisoners had been allowed to meet their 
lawyers orJy once since their arrest five months ago 
and that their families were not permitted to visit. 

A similar memora.^dum was sent by the Higher 
Islamic Committee of the West Bank to the United 
Nations Secretary-General and to President Nixon in 
which the Committee requested the ending of torture 
of political prisoners and their immediate release. 

Sit-ins were organized by the prisoners' families 
in Beit Sahour, Jerusalem, Nablus and other towns 
in the occupied territories in protest against the arrests 
and the ill-treatment of the prisoners. 

Protest meeting are being organized daily in the 
occupied territories by the liberal forces in Israel 
against the wave of arrests and the torture of prisoners. 
Delegations of the inhabitants of different towTis in 
the occupied territories have met with the Israeli 
military governors in their respective regions and 
requested the immediate release of the prisoners. 

In the face of increasing protests in the occupied 
territories and inside Israel itself, the Zionist elements 
in agreement with the authorities strive to intimidate 
the prisoners lawyen who were the first to unveil the 
truth concerning torture and ill-treatment of prisoners. 
Lawyer Felicia Langer, who actively defends the 


political prisoners is their first victim. For a long time 
now she has been receiving threatening messages and 
telephone calls. On June 13, the situation became 
much more serious when several bandits entered her 
house in Jerusalem and placed a charge of dynamite. 
It was only through her and her husband's vigilance 
that a tragedy was avoided. 


"Our fathers, husbands, brothers and sons have 
been under so-called preventive detention since April 
22, 1974, because, according to the Israeli authorities, 
of alleged expressions against the celebrations of Israeli 
independence day. They are still in prison without 
having been charged .... A number of them, accord- 
ing to their lawyers, have been brutally beaten. 

"We cannot visit them although the legal period 
of investigation is over. The authorities still refuse to 
supply any details concerning the prisoners Suleiman 

Naj[jab, Mohamed Abu Gharbyeh, Abdullah al- 
Beirat, Husni Haddad and others. For the Israeli 
public, the auhtorities try to justify their campaign 
of terror by declaring that these prisoners are members 
of a 'sabotage organization.* This expression is used 
loosely all the time by the authorities 

"As is well known to the authorities and the liberal 
forces .for peace in Israel, the truth is that these prisoners 
are in favour of a just peace in the Middle East and 
are fervent opponents of any form of chauvinism 
wherever it is manifested. They declare that they are 
for a solution of the Middle East conflict on the basis 
of international resolutions and the respect of all the 
peoples in this region. 

"We consider their arrest and the tortures inflicted 
on them as well as the denial of the right of visiting 
and the withholding of information about the fate of 
several of them as an act against all efforts to establish 
a just peace in the region. Moreover, this is a violation 
of the International Declaration of Human Rights. 

"We urgenUy appeal to all those who believe in 
justice and democracy. We request them to protest 
against these arrests, to insist on the ending of tortures 
and the immediate release of prisoners." 

(5 frA.v* ■.-^»».'4^ 


 ««C^ "i ^yl 


The practices denounced in the preceding testi- 
monies are not mere accidents as the succession of 
different governments in Israel would like to be 
believed, but are in keeping with the nature of the 
state and its policy. 

In fact, the Israeli state, which is envisaged as ex- 
clusively Jewish according to the Zionist ideology, 
implies the rejection of the Palestinian people and 
its explusion by force from its land. 

The Zionist authorities have systematically tried 
to destroy the Palestinian people physically, politically 
and culturally. These practices (dynamiting houses, 
deportations, collective punishments, etc . . ) clearly 
reveal the colonial character of Israel. They were 
used by the French and Portuguese colonialists and by 
While Power in South Africa and Rhodesia. They 
also unmask Israeli "democracy", a democracy which 
the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations 
described as: "A privilege enjoyed exclusively by the 
colons and which is not open to everyone." 

Palestinian held under adminislTative detention. 



In a report published in 1974, the Dcmocraiic 
Popular From for ihe Liberation of Palestine (DPFLP) 
exposed the following facts: 

The detained Palestinians have organized themselves 
inside the prisons. They have grouped themselves 
and were able to circulate two clandestine newspapers. 
The Israelis use heinous methods of torture and terror. 
Of these methods, psychological torture is commonly 
practiced. For example: 

1. News broadcast transmitted by the Israeli state 
radio and translated into Arabic in order to demoralize 
the prisoners. 

2. Circulation of fabricated news concexning al- 
Icdgedly unsuccessful resistance operations by Pales- 
tinians in which the protagonists are said to have been 

3. Describing the Palestinian revolution as being 
on the verge of defeat and announcing its forthcoming 

The methods of physical torture most commonly 
used are the following: 

1. Arranging meetings between the prisoners and 
attractive women for the purpose of obtaining informa- 
tion. If they refuse, the prisoners are beaten on their 
genitals and metal needles are introduced into these 
organs for long periods. The two prisoners Mourad 
Al-Bahi and Abdel Shahinc are among those who 
suffered such tortures. 

2. Using electroshocks in all prisons. 

3. Burning all parts of the body with lit cigarettes. 

4. Slamming doors on fingers followed by beatings 
with metal rulers. 

5. Pulling out of nails previously squashed. 

6. Using police dogs to attack and bite naked prisoners 
until they faint. 

7. Applying a paper solution on prisoners' wounds 
which in the long run causes brain damage to brain 

8. Hanging down prisoners by arms or legs for long 
pericxls, a practice which can cause paralysis. 

9. Blindfolding prisoners and forcing them to run 
handcuffed on a road full of holes. When they fall 
down, the prisoners are beaten and forced to get up 
by the Israeli soldiers. This is done until they faint. 

10. Throwing urine and feces at the face of prisoners 
and sometimes urinating in their mouths. 

11. Wounding prisoners and covering their wounds 
with salt. 

12. Placing prisoners in a cell and torturing them 
with lights and loud sounds, .^s a result of these bar- 
barous tortures, many prisoners arc now invalids. 

To cite some examples: 

— Monayed Al-Bahich is paralyzed in the left arm. 

— Latifa El-Hourv- is half paralized 

~ Abdclaziz Shanine had his vertebral column broken 
and was later executed. 

-Ibrahim al-Najjar is disfigured and has lost both 
eyes and his right ami. 

— Walid al-Ramaki has a skull fracture. 

Wakim Nassar has a crushed chest and his back 

-Mohamed Dahmach has a skull fracture which 
led to madness. 


The prisoners are distributed in pnsons inside Israel 
such as Askalan, Bir el-Sabch, al-Ramleh, Beit Leif, 
Kfar Yaine, Haifa, .'\kka, Sarafand and Shatta as 
well as in the occupied territories: Nablus, Galilee, 
Jenin, Gaza, Toulkarem and Khan-Younis. 


The prison contains over 1000 prisoners and is re- 
served for th9se with life sentences. It is notorious for its 
solitary cells. It has a special wing for women. The 
prisoners are forced to make camouflage nets for the 
Israeli army. This prison is also famous for its X-ray 
torture chambers and for the solitary cells in which 
the prisoners are placed while their wounds are 


This prison is situated in a desert region. It specializes 
in hard labour,ironworks, carpentry' and construc- 
tion. At night, the Israeli soldiers throw grenades 
and shoot to keep the prisoners terrorized. 


About ICXX) prisoners are held in what was formerly 
a military prison. The conditions of life there are 
the hardest: it is impossible to sleep day or night. 
It is extremely humid and never sees the sun. In this 
prison, many prisoners have lost their health. 



This prison holds about 500 prisoners and there arc 
eight sohlary cells. It is a penitentiar>'. In order to 
break the prisoners' morale and obtain information 
from them before the trial, all prisoners are subjected 
to long periods of physical torture which has caused 
the death of Ibrahim al-Kaharouf and many others. 


This prison, about 10 kms. from Toulkarem, can 
hold 300 prisoners. It is well defended and all deserting 
officers are sent to it. It is forbidden to speak in the 
cells which are very small and inadequately ventilated. 


This prison is administered by the Military Intel- 
ligence Service and is composed only of solitar>' cells 
and torture chambers. 


In this prison the prisoners are forced to work on 
Zionist war projects. It also has a paper factory. 


This prison which can hold 1000 prisoners is con- 
sidered the centre of distribution to other prisons. It is 
reserved for those sentenced to more than five years. It 
is a three-story building and has six solitary cells and 
twenty extremely humid cells. 


There are more than 800 prisoners in this prison. 
It acts as a centre for interrogations and regional 


This prison is famous for its solitary cells where the 
most barbarous tortures are practiced. 


This prison for women is divided into two parts, the 
first, containing 28 cells is reserved for v^omen who 
have committed civil offences, the other, containing 
21 cells, is reserved for women having committed 
"crimes against the safety of the state." 

Conlribulmg to tlu hrarit war macltme. 



The barbaric and inhuman pracQccs of the state of 
Israel are not limited to the torture of Palestinian 
prisoners. Concentration camps are built in the 
Sinai Desert in order to break the resistance of the 
Palestiiuan people of Gaza. In this desert, three main 
concentration camps existed before 1971 : Nakl, Abou 
Zeinah and al-Kasima. In 1971, the monastery of 
St. Catherine was transformed into a conccniralion 
camp and other camps were built at al-Arish and Wadi 
Moussa. The camps are made of tents in which one 
or several families arc crammed with simply a curtain 
acting as a separation. They are completely isolated 
from the rest of the world : no newspapers, no books, 
no radios and no visits. 

In addition to the concentration camps, the Israeli 

army has under its control extensive regions in the Gaza 
Strip which are surrounded by barbed wire. Nobody 
is allowed to enter or leave these regions without 
permission from the military authorities. 
There are three concentration camps in the Rafah 

—The camp of Oum Kalab north of Rafah. The 
number of inmates is estimated at 2000. 
—The camp of Biouk, north of Rafah, SliOO inmates. 
— The camp of Masrouk, east of Rafah, 1500 inmates. 
The decision to build thr concentration camps 
was taken at the highest military and political levels. 
The control of the camps has been given to a special 
army unit under the command of General .Shiomo 
Gazit, Assistant Director of Military Intelligence, 
and former Military Governor of Gaza. 


Sole Aspects of the Israeli Annexationist Policy As Practiced In Jerusalem : 
"A Case Study of the Potential Annexation of the Occupied Territories" 

(By Ibraham Dakkak) 


The Israeli decision on the 14th of August 1977 to equalize the services in the 
West Bank and Gaza Strip with that of Israel came as a logical outcome to the 
designs of the Likud Government headed by Menahem Begin. The statement ^ 
of the secretary of the Israeli Government on the eve of that decision left no 
room for doubt that the Begin Government had committed itself to the total an- 
nexation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Israel. 

The equalization process might take some time to implement fully, but the ulti- 
mate goal could well be seen set and on the move. This is all reminiscent of two 
historical events. The first was the occupation of the Holy Land by the Crusaders 
in the 11th century. The second was the annexation of Jerusalem by Israel on 
28 June 1967. In both cases the goal was the land and no respect or care were 
given to the future of the Arabs living on it. Endeavors to get rid of the inhabitants 
in both cases were made. The Crusaders resorted to massacres, the Israelis re- 
sorted to other means. 

It is unlikely that we can draw a mechanical comparison between the two 
events. But it is worthwhile noting that these two historical events took place at 
a time when the prevailing social and economic systems were suffering from a 
decaying process. Both the Crusaders and the Zionists resorted to religion as a 
cover which fixed their direction towards Palestine. The sufferings as a result 
to these two pursuits were the lot of the Palestinian Arabs. 

The equalization policy was first spoken of in the declaration of the Israeli 
foreign Ministry on 28 June 1967 (Annexation day). The spokesman stated that 
"the basic purpose of the ordinance ^ was to provide full municipal and social 
services to all inhabitants of Jerusalem. They would enjoy complete equality in 
respect of services, welfare and education." ^ The Thalmann report published by 
the Secretary General of the United Nations on 12 Septemher 1967 stated that 
the declared objective of the Israeli Government was to equalize the legal and 
administrative status of residents of these parts of the city which were not pre- 
viously controlled by Israel with that of Israel's Citizens.* Therefore the notion 
of equalization of services dates back to June 1967. It had constituted a prelude 
to the annexation of Jerusalem at that time. 

For some time "the Israeli Government assumed an ambiguous position. Out- 
wardly, it stressed that the step taken did not constitute annexation, while for 
internal consumption it emphasized that annexation was full and complete. The 
effect of the Government legislation however, was not in the least ambiguous. 
The law of annexation clearly applied Israeli law, jurisdiction and administra- 
tion to the annexed area." ^ 

In the light of this policy it is fair enough to consider the Israeli equalization 
decision issued on 14 August 1977 as a prelude to the total annexation of the West 
Bank and Gaza Strip. 

It is logical as well to assume that the Israeli authorities will make use of 
their ten years previous experience gained in the Jerusalem annexation process. 

Thus a study of the Arab plight in Jerusalem in the last ten years will shed 
some light on the projected conditions of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The 
study intends to clarify some aspects of the Israeli practices in Jerusalem 
during and after annexation on one hand, and the means to counteract the 
grave consequences resulting from the application of this policy on the Arabs 
in the occupied areas on the other hand. 

1 The Jerusalem Post, Aug. 15, 1977. Mr. Noar stated that one would not annex what 
he owns. 

2 The administrative order issued by the Israeli Minister of the Interior, H. M. Shapira, 
enlarging the area of the Israeli Jerusalem Municipality on June 28, 1&67. That was 

? receded by three laws : one on the protection of the Holy Places ; the second to apply 
sraeli law, jurisdiction, and administration to areas formerly part of mandatory Palestine 
and designated for this purpose by the Government ; the third to enlarge the area of any 
municipality by administrative order. 

3 The Shiloah Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, Tel-Aviv University, Mid- 
dle East Record 1967, Israel Universities Press, Jerusalem, 1971, p. 290. 

* Ibid p. 292. 

^ Benvenisti, Meron ; "Jerusalem, the Torn City ;" Isratypest Ltd. Jerusalem 1976 ; pp. 



The need of the Israelis to annex Jerusalem stems from their endeavor to 
justify the religious Biblical vision which frames the Zionist ideology ; and 
the costly fight against the Arabs in Palestine. In fact, it is prompted by the 
desire of the Israeli leadership to divert the attention of the Israelis from 
their daily social plight to chauvinistic goals and means. 

The controversy between the Jews and the Arabs, which took its novel form 
in the Jerusalem problem, has long abandoned the ideological confrontation for 
actual conflict. The relationship between the Arabs in Jerusalem and the Is- 
raeli administration can hardly be other than antagonistic. 

The Arabs of Jerusalem justly think that they have the full right to see the 
future of Jerusalem in an Arab perspective. They are justified as well in their 
refusal to see it through an Israeli eye. This Arab attitude has kept Jerusalem 
demographically, socially and even geographically divided in spite of all the 
Israeli measures to unify it." 

The Arabs, in their defence of their identity, the Arab character of the City, 
their property, their Holy Places and their culture are at loggerheads with the 
Israeli authorities. Their plight is humanly unparalleled today. They have 
developed the feeling that their challenge is human and universal in a messianic 
way. They believe rightly that it is the duty of humanity to rise to their defence. 

After the issuing of all the laws and regulations to annex Jerusalem the 
Israeli authorities turned to the practical issue ; the Judaization of the City. 

The first step was to set up commissions to draw the new Jerusalem planning 
scheme. In 1968 the Prime Minister Mr. Eshkol declared that "the historical 
rights of the People of Israel would have to be taken into account, and that 
Israel would on the other hand, be unable to ignore the concentration of Arab 
population in certain areas".'' 

The oflScial planning scheme for Jerusalem was not known when its blessings 
showed up very quickly in the form of land expropriation in the New and Old 
City of Jerusalem. The steps which followed explained the general characteris- 
tics of the planning scheme to be applied in the City. Some aspects of these 
characteristics were conveyed to the public through the local Press, other 
publication and building activities. The following points explain the general 
aims of the scheme : 

1. The Israeli expropriation of 116 dunams in the Old City of Jerusalem.^ The 
plan called for the expulsion of 10,000 Arabs " under the pretext of congestion and 
bad housing conditions.^" At the same time they planned to accommodate 5,000 
Jews in the extended Jewish Quarter. 

2. The wiping out of the Arab Mc^hrabi Quarter adjacent to the Wailing Wall. 

3. The Arab Areas outside the City wall were classified into three categories :" 

(a) Archeological sites where building was not allowed. 

( b ) Green Areas where no construction was allowed. 

(c) Special areas subject to si>ecial regulations which limit building 

Most of the land left outside these zones was expropriated. This expropriated 
land exceeded 20,000 dunams " used completely for the building of new Jewish 
neighborhoods and satellites :" 

1. Ramat Eshkol : (600 dunams, 2,200 dwellings, services) . 

2. MaalotDafna (270 dunams, 1,400 dwellings, services). 

« Dnkkak, Ibrahim ; "Al Kuds Wa A'Shru Sanawat Mln Al Mu'Anah" ; Al-Kuds, June 1977 

" Schul, Zee'v ; "The Meaning of the New Map" ; The Jerusalem Post Magazine, June 2G, 
1968 ; p. 6. 

8 The No. of Arabs per dunam in the Old City is 140 while No. of Jews per dunam is 36. 

" Mr. Kollek, the Israel Mayor of Jerusalem, mentioned during the discussion in the 
meeting of the Jerusalem Committee that the need stands to minimize the density of the 
Arabs in the Old City where the occupancy reaches to 10 persons per room (cf ; the Jeru- 
salem Committee proceedings II, 1973, p. 37). The 10,000 figure was suggested by the Jeru- 
salem planning team (Of. Sharon Arieh ; "I'lanning Jerusalem the Old City and Its Envi- 
rons" ; VVeidenfeld and Nicolson ; Jerusalem 1973 p. 117). 

" Sharon, Arieh ; op. cit ; p. 117. 

" Ibid. 

12 Dakkak, Ibrahim ; Ta'Atheer Al-Ihtilal Al-Israeli A'La Al-Iskan Al-Arabl Fi Al-Kuds ; 
A paper submitted to the Housing Symposium in Amman in Apr. 1977 (Mimeographed) 
p. 6 (Arabic). 

" Kroyanker, David; "Developing Jerusalem 1967-1975"; Jerusalem Foundation and 
David Kroyanker 1975 ; pp. 191-202. 


3. Bamot (2,500 dunams, 8,000 dwellings, 35,000 inhabitants). 

4. Neve Yacoub (820 dunams, 4,000 dwellings, 17,000 inhabitants) . 

5. Gilo (10,000 dwellings, 35,000 inhabitants). 

6. East Talpiot (2,700 dunams, 5,000 dwellings, 15,000 inhabitants). 

The future plans for the rest of the Arab land in the area of Jerusalem and its 
environs are not yet officially revealed. But information leaked in the local Press 
reveals the following : 

1. 70,000 dunams to tihe east of Jerusalem were announced to be restricted areas 
by military order. On this land the Maale Adumim (Al-Khan Al-Ahmar) center 
was established." 

2. New Jew^ish settlements were suggested by the planner Sliaked, to be built 
around the City of Jerusalem. Three of these settlements and four villages are 
suggested to accommodate (75,000-150,000) inhabitants, and five satellites are to 
accommodate 25,000 inhabitants. The location for these settlements is suggested 
to be to the north and north west of Ramallah ^^ and at Al-Khan Al-Ahmar men- 
tioned before. 

3. Other settlements are suggested also to the north west of Ramallah, and in 
the Ras to the north and north west of Beit Jala." 

4. A 10,000 dwellings scheme between Neve Yacoub and French Hill is under 

5. It was reported that another 10,000 dwellings, are to be built between Ramot 
(Nabi Samuel) and Neve Yacoub by the year 1982". 

6. By the end of the decade there should be close to 40,000 Jewish families liv- 
ing beyond the former armistice line.^* 

The aim of this pursuit is to keep the Arab population in Jerusalem within a 
one third minority limit ". 

This policy was maintained, and the execution of it was facilitated by the 
'open bridge' policy. This policy acted as release value for the jobless and the 
homeless and effectively decreased the resistance of the population to these 
Israeli designs. 

The one third to two thirds policy "" logically called for the same percentage 
of constructional activity for both groups, but this was never followed by the 
Israeli administration. 

The Israeli plan called for the building of 68.000 extra rooms for the Arabs 
by the year 1985 and 250,000 for the Jews based on an occupancy rate of 1.2 per- 
sons/room for the Jews and 1.6 persons/room for the Arabs ^. 

If the 68,000 rooms are converted to housing units that should have been built 
up until 1976 the number should have been 7,400 units. During the same period 
only 1,000 residential units were established either in the form of simple units 
or as extensive additions to existing housing ^. In other words the Arab housing 
programme as envisaged by the planning authority lagged by more than 6,000 

On the other hand it is a well known fact in Jerusalem that many residential 
units in the Jewish neighborhoods built on expropriated Arab land find no Jews 
to occupy them. These were left to accommodate potential new-comers. 

The Israeli drive towards giving Jerusalem a dominant Jewish character 
touched extra sensitive i>oints, namely the Haram Al-Sharif. 

The problem of the property of this Holy Sanctuary was given prominence 
upon the challenge of the Israelis to tlie Muslim authority. The Moslems from 
the beginning of the Zionist movement have been deeply suspicious of Jewish 
intentions. They always feared that the Jews ultimately aimed at the seizure of 
Al-Haram Al-Sharif and the destruction of the Islamic Sanctuaries. Although 

" Dakkak, Ibrahim ; op. clt ; app. No. 5. 

15 Ash-Sha'Ab Daily Newspaper, Dec. 9. 1975. 

18 Ibid. 

" Rabinovleh, Abraham ; "On Building a Fortress Around Jerusalem" ; Jerusalem Post 
Magazine ; Nov. 8, 1974. 
« Ibid. 

19 Kroyanker, David ; op. eit ; p. 20. 

20 Professor N. Lichfield, The then Chief Planner in the Jerusalem Municipality declared 
in his comments in the discussions of the Jerusalem Committee that this proportion was 
discated by the Prime Minister of Israel. (Cf. Jerusalem Committee proceedings II, 1973 ; 
p. 53) 

21 The Jerusalem Master Plan Bureau, "The Master Plan 1968" ; interim report, con- 
densed from table 3, p. a6. 

22 Kroyanker, David ; op. clt ; p. 44. 


this was denied by the Zionist and the Israelis time and again, there were Jewish 
writers, scholars and visionaries who gave substance to such suspicions ^. 

Moreover, in June 1907, within hours of the conquest of the Old City, the Chief 
Rabbi of the Israeli army. Brigadier Goren, with some of his followers entered 
the Area and conducted Jewish prayers (in the Haram . . . and a few weeks 
later he suggested erecting a synagogue on the Esplanade of Al-Aksa Mosque. In 
addition, on 17 August 19d9, four days before the fire in the Aksa Mosque, a group 
of the Jewish National Youth-Betar ^* against the protests of the Muslim officials 
held a ceremonial parade in the precincts near the Dome of the Rock, where their 
leader in his address complained that the Temple Mount was still "held by Aliens" 
and called for the rebuilding of a third Temple.'^ 

Moreover, in September 1967, the Defense Minister confiscated the keys of the 
Moghrabi Gate thus depriving the Muslims of their long established right to sole 
control of the entrances and areas of the Haram Al-Sharif. This reflected a deep 
concern and suspicion that the Haram could be desecrated and probably sub- 
jected to sinister designs. Tliis feeling was further reinforced by the burning of 
Al-Aksa Mosque on 21 August 1969. 

Although the authorities were able to prove that the gutting was made by a 
Christian from Australia ^* and not by a Jew, the investigation set up by the Mus- 
lim Council shed doubt on the official claim. The Committee which was composed of 
engineers reported that the fire started in more than one locality at the same time, 
which implied that more than one person was involved. 

The appeal of thirteen Jews on 13 April 19b9, four months before the fire in the 
MosQue, to the High Court of Justice for an order nisi against the Minister of 
Police "' was considered a prelude to the Israeli designs against the Al-Haram 
Al-Sharif. The order nisi asked the Minister to give cause why he should not 
ensure that suitable protection be given by the Israeli Police, to prevent the appli- 
cants' prayer from being disturbed . . . and to show reason why instruction 
should not be given to Israeli Police personnel to refrain from interfering with 
the applicants' prayer.^* 

The rejection of the High Court to the request was based on the remarks of the 
Attorney General which agreed, inter alia, with the views expressed by the Min- 
ister of Religious Affairs in the Knesset which stated that "there is nothing in 
the law which forbids a minyau (a gathering of ten Jews) from visiting the Tem- 
ple Mount and praying there", he added, "however the implementation of this 
right depends on the maintenance of public order, and this was within the juris- 
diction of the Minister of Police *"" ". The Attorney General, on his part, assessed 
the problem as political and not judicial ^^ 

The decision taken by these Israeli Officers practically legalized the Jewish 
claim to the proi)erty of tiie Haram Al-Sharif and the right of the Jews to pray 
on it in contravention of the status quo agreement on the Holy Places issued 
in 1930. The Minister of Religious Affairs stressed this fact in a press inter- 
view by saying that the Temple Mount (Al-Haram Al-Sharif) and the Tomb 
of the Patriarchs in Hebron (the Ibrahimi Mosque) are Jewish property be- 
cause they w'ere purchased with blood and money .^ 

The question arises as to what are the prospects for the property of the Haram 
and the rights of the Muslims? 

The answer could best be found in the permission granted for the Jews to use 
the Ibrahim Mosque in Hebron in the form of a fait accomplis and in the enforce- 
ment of a modus vivindi in the situation. It is highly probable in the light of 
this experience and the statement of the Minister for Religious Affairs men- 
tioned above that a similar situation may be forced on the Haram in Jerusalem 
as a prelude to the total control. This is reminiscent of the Crusaders' action in 
converting the Dome of the Rock into the Church of Templum Domini and the 
Aksa Mosque to Templum Solomonis. However, the consequences of such action 
remain to be known in the event of these suspicions materializing. 

=3 Zanior, Walter, "Israel and the Holy Places of Chrlstiandon" ; Weldenfeld and Nlcol- 
son, London 1971 ; p. 2. 

=" The youth orRanization of the Herut Party headed by Menahem Begin. 

^ .Terusalem Post, Aug. 18, 1969. Quoted by Zander, Walter op. cit ; p. 2. 

2« Rohan. 

^ Benvenisti. Meron ; op. clt ; p. 293. 

2" Ibid ; pp. 293-294. 

=» Ibid. 

3" Ibid. 

" Ibid ; pp. 288-89. 


The application of the Israeli law in Jerusalem brought more problems to the 
Jerusalem Arabs. "The officials of the Israeli Ministery of Religious Affairs 
wanted to impose all the Israeli laws and procedures on the Sharia (Religious) 
legal system of East Jerusalem. The Ministry . . . also wanted to take over con- 
trol of the Waqf (MusUm endowment) property'"'. The Israelis considered that 
the Sharia in Israel was not identical with the one applied in Jordan. Besides 
the Qadis (Judges) did not renounce their Jordanian citizenship and did not 
swear allegiance to the President of Israel. The reaction of the Muslim leader- 
ship came in the form of a Fatwa '■" which objected to the Israeli interference 
in Muslim religious affairs. The Fatwa stated, inter alia, "since the principle of 
Islamic law require Muslims to take upon themselves, under conditions such 
as those now reigning, all responsibility for matters of their religion, it is pro- 
hibited for non-Musliums to be in-charge in Muslim religious affairs." 

The Fatwa, as such, gave the Islamic legal background to resist the Israeli 
interference in Islamic affairs. It also gave spirit for all those who cared to 
resist the annexation of Jerusalem and general occupation on political grounds. 

Depending on this Fatwa the Sharia Courts work now independently of the 
Israeli authorities and on the willingness of the people to accept its rulings. 

The Israelis stopped at no limit to force their will and to create conditions 
suitable for their purposes. One of their activities which caused concern to the 
Arabs and the world at large was the archeological excavations conducted 
around Al-Haram Al-Sharif. Two digs were started. One was under the super- 
vision of Benjamin Mazar of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The othel 
one was sponsored by the Israeli Ministry of Religious Affairs. 

The mazar dig started in 1968 and is still in progress today. It covers the 
area to the south and south west of the Haram Al-Sharif. 

The Ministry of Religious Affairs dig took the form of tunnelling under 
Islamic buildings of great historical value and was supervised by Rabbi Perla, 
who lacked knowledge and interest in the value of the area on top of the tun- 
nel. All he cared for was to expose the Herodian wall underneath. 

Although less incompetent than the dig of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, 
the Mazar dig nevertheless constituted an eminent danger to the future of the 
Haram Al-Sharif and the area surrounding it. Chief Rabbi Nissim in a memoran- 
dum to the Ministerial Committee for the Holy Places approved that the four 
walls of Al-Haram area are sanctified and that praying at the wall is the main 
thing, and everything else is incidental. He asked that all the length of the west- 
ern wall of the Haram be cleared of all the buildings adjacent to it and that it be 
made available for worship.^ 

It is feared that this attitude of the Religious authority reinforced by the 
finds of the dig from the Herodian period would turn the whole area surround- 
ing the Haram into a Jewish praying area. The ultimate result of such a policy 
is that it would turn the Islamic historical area and the Haram in particular 
into a Jewish domain. 

The tunnelling conducted by the Ministry of Religious Affairs was visited 
many times by the author in his capacity as the engineer in charge of the res- 
toration of the Aksa Mosque. It is 2-3 meters wide dug through the soil 
bearing the foundation of the Islamic historical buildings on top of it. One side 
of it exposes the Herodian wall, the other side and the ceiling were supported 
by timber for some time. 

Tlie meager supervision by the Ministry of Religious Affairs of this dig is a 
cause for more suspicion and worry for the Muslims, especially if we consider the 
influence held by the Chief Rabbis over this Ministry and its personnel. 

The suspicions harboured by all concerned proved correct when cracks 
started to appear in the historical buildings. A summary of these incidents is 
given here : 

1. The Ribat Kurd (Hospice of the Amir Kurd, was founded by Al-Maqarr Al- 
Sayfi Kurd. Sahib Al-Diyar Mi«r>ya in the year 693/1293^.^ "The Ribat par- 
tially collapsed in December 1971 as a result of extensive tunnelling by Israel's 
Ministry of Religious Affairs . . . almost at once the damaged hospice became 
a focus of world wide attention, since the Ministry of Religious Affairs hoped 

32 Ihirt : p. 283. 

33 Fatwa In Arabic means a Binding Religious Opinion. 
3< Bpnvenisti. Mpron : op. cit ; n. .S14. 

35 Hanbali. Mujir-TTl-Din ; "Al-Uns Al-Jalll Bi Tarlkh Al-Kuds Wa Al-Khalll" ; 2 vol. 
Muhtasib, 2d vol. p. 37 (Arabic) 1973. 


to exploit the situation by demolishing the precarious structure, and its neigh- 
bours, to create a second wailing wall 'piazza', this one in the heart of the 
Muslim Quarter. Opposition to this plan prevented any immediate action and 
makeshift supports were erected to prevent further collapse until a decision was 
taken." *" This opposition came from the Muslim Council in .Jeru.salem, Dame 
Kathleen Kenyon " and many other concerned bodies. Mr. Benvenisti, the Dep- 
uty Mayor of Jerusalem describes the incident as follows : 

"The excavation of the Ministry of Reigious Affairs reached the critical 
period in December 1971 and the Ministry requested approval for the dem- 
olition of an ancient ramshackle building '^ that blocked the extension of 
the tunnel." ^ 

2. Al-Madrasa Al-Jawhariya (Al-Jawhariya School).*" It was built by Emir 
Safiy Al-Din Jawhar in the year 844/1440. The school is adjacent to Ribat Kurd 
on the northern side of Bab Al-Hadid street. It stands on top of the aforemen- 
tioned tunnel. Serious cracks were reported by the author on March 10, 1974. 
The Israeli authorities agreed to support it and reinforce it. But the result 
was disapopinting. 

3. Al-Madrasa Al-Othmaniyya founded by Isfahan Shah Khatoun. daughter 
of Mahmud Al Uthmani in the year WO/1437." The Resident Engineer of the 
Aksa Mosque reported the collapse of the interior vestibule on Friday December 
19, 1975.*^ His evaluation of the cause of the collapse was that the extensive 
tunnelling conducted under the school by the Ministry of Religious Affairs was 
responsible. These activities gave signs of collapse four years before. The Israeli 
authorities were notified but no response was made. The Engineer considered 
that the Uthmaniyya and all buildings lining on top of the tunnel stand on 
virtually no foundation. Any vertical or lateral displacement, therefore, would 
result in serious damage to this historical building. 

The Area under which this irresponsible activity takes place is the richest in 
Mamluk buildings in the world outside Cairo and Damascus. 

World opinion in general and UNESCO in particular condemned this Israeli 
activity many times. In Paris in 1974 and in Nairobi in 1976 Israel faced puni- 
tive measures from UNESCO. 


The case study of Jerusalem under Israeli administration as summarized in 
the previous section is meant to shed some light on the detrimental consequences 
of the potential annexation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Israel in one 
way or another. 

It was mentioned before that the equalization of services philosophy dates 
back to 1967. At that time it was meant as a first step towards the annexation 
of Jerusalem. In the case of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip one can trace 
that philosophy to two important decisions taken on two different dates, namely : 
the decision to consider the Al'Ienby Bridge and the Damia Bridge " on the River 
Jordan as official points of entrance to Israel, and the other was to change the 
status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip from occupied areas to administered 
territories. Tlie direct objective was to establish new facts to facilitate the fu- 
ture annexation of these areas. 

Annexation might take different meanings in different circumstances. But 
the Israeli trend is to create a dominion able to serve the purposes of the re- 
ligious groups, economic pressure groups and military and security services. 

The options open to Israel to apply this form of hegemony were few. Total 
unification was criticized by some Israelis for fear of the enormous potential 
increase in the percentage of Arabs in Israel. The idea in principle was generally 
accepted provided that the Arabs be got rid of by means of economic, social and 

39 Borjjoyne, H. M. ; "The Continued Survey of the Rlbat Kurd Madrasa Jff^wTiariyya 
Complex In Tarlq Bab Al-Hadld — Jerusalem", Levant VI, the British School of Archeology, 
Jerusalem. 1974 ; p. .51. 

37 The Times — London Aug. 17, 1972. See also Jerusalem Post Aug. 18. 1972. 

3» Rlhat Kurd Building. 

3» Benvenisti. Meron : op. clt : p. 320. 

♦"The Aksa Mosque Restoration Committee Archives. Letters No. MM/8/69/47, 107, 216 
dated Mar. 10, 1974. Mav 25, 1974 and Oct. 1, 1974 respectively. 

" Hanbali, Mujlr-Ul-Din ; op. clt ; p. 37. 

*2 The Aksa Mosque Restoration Committee Archives, Letter No. 510/281 dated Dec. 20, 

*3 Both bridges fall on the cease fire line with Jordan. 


political pressures and emigration to Arab countries. But tlie mass exodus of 
these inhabitants under tliese conditions might create political and legal pressures 
that Israel could not face." 
vol. XI. No. 39 ; Cairo ; p. 45. 

Another choice voiced by the Allon Plan and by the mass media suggested a 
dual Israeli/Jordanian hegemony allowing the inhabitants to retain their Jor- 
danian citizenship under a Jordanian civil administration and at the same 
time to allow Israeli political, economic and military dominance. 

A third option was to grant the local Palestinians civil administration under 
the protection of Israel. 

All three options were refused by the Palestinians in these areas because they 
could not meet their minimum aspirations of free self-determination and the 
termination of occupation. 

The Israelis in their determination to create of the occupied territories an 
Israeli "Lebenraum" found no way to achieve this objective except by denying 
the Palestinians their rights. 

One should remember that the 1967 war added more than one million *° con- 
sumers to the Israeli market as well as cheap labour for its industry and 
agriculture. The Israeli authorities, making use of the low productivity of Arab 
agriculture, attracted tens of thousands of farmers and i>easants to work in 
Israel expecting to neutralize their opposition to occupation and to minimize 
their care for the land and to encourage them to abandon it "' thereby creating 
a floating labour force which has no commitment to the land, and opening the 
way at the same time, for more Jewish settlement in the abandoned areas. 

The need of the Israelis to annex Jerusalem stems from religious and ideo- 
logical considerations as well as pragmatic ones. It was an imperative prelude to 
the annexation of the whole area. It served as a test case for public opinion, 
bureaucratic procedures and political manipulations. The need of the Israelis to 
annex the West Bank and Gaza Strip is greater in terms of geopolitics and 

The "Sharon Plan" has defined that need in explicit terms which superseded 
any previous declaration including the Galilee Document (1973) and the Allon 
Plan (1972). In his speech on the Golan Heights Mr. Sharon, the Minister of 
Agriculture and the chairman of the Ministerial Committee for Settlement, said 
that Israel must take on a twenty year programme to settle two million Jews on 
the coastal plain from the Golan Heiglits in the north to Sharm El-Slieikh in the 
south.*' The aim of that plan is three fold : 

1. Thickening the area of Jewish settlements in the Jerusalem Corridor. 

2. Establishing a complex of settlements in the area stretching west to a line 
between Jenin, Nablus and Ramallah : 

3. planning a network of roads at the center of Israel from the sea in the 
west to the Jordan valley in the east.** 

Senator Abourezk. Our final witness is Mr. Fouzi Al-Asmar, who is 
a poet and an Israeli citizen of Palestinian- Arab origin. He is also 
editor of Miftah, which is a bilingual publishing house in Israel. 



Mr. Al-Asmar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me to testify 
before this subcommittee. I am a Palestinian Arab and a citizen of 
the State of Israel. I am here to testify before this subcommittee today 
in my capacity as a journalist, author and editor of Miftah, a bi- 
lingual — Arabic, Hebrew — publishing house in Israel. 

I wish to submit to this subcommittee that the policies which are 
being used by the Israeli authorities with regard to the local popula- 

** Amad, Adna ; "Al-Hukuk-Al Mughtasaba Lllinsan Al-FiHstinl" Asslasah Addawllj'eh, 
*^ In other words the consumption increased by more than 30 percent. 

*«BarKhuti, Bashir ; "Attabaka Al-Amila Wa Attahalufat Assiyasleh," Salahuddln, Jeru- 
salem, 1977 ; p. 27 (Arabic). 
" Ma'Arive : September 1977. 
*8 Ibid. 

20-488 O - 78 - 8 


tion in the occupied territories of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the 
Golan Heif^hts and the Sinai Peninsula which have been under Israeli 
military occupation since the 1967 war, are in essence similar to those 
which have been used by the same authorities against the so-called 
"Israeli Arabs" since 1948. 

In fact, the nature of the treatment of the Palestinian Arab popula- 
tion in the occupied territories as it has been indicated through previ- 
ous testimonies before this subcommittee, for example, Prof. Israel 
Shahak, is no different from that suffered by the Palestinian Arab 
population under Israeli rule since 1948. 

In order to learn this nature it would be instructive to examine the 
way in which Israeli Arabs have been treated throughout the years. 
I propose in this testimony to examine two aspects of this treatment : 
First, the violations of the right of free social, cultural, and political 
association; and second, the use of the defense — emergency — regula- 
tions of 1945. 

Contrary to the testimony of Prof. Yehuda Zvi Blum, who testified 
before this subcommittee on October 17, 1977, I wish to suggest that 
Arabs in Israel are not free to form their own political, social, or cul- 
tural associations. 

Legally, indeed, Palestinian Arabs who are Israeli citizens are al- 
lowed to form such associations. It should be indicated at this point 
that not every Arab in the state is an Israeli citizen. Arabs, unlike 
Jews, even if born in the State of Israel, do not receive citizenship 
automatically, but rather have to apply for it. Jews, on the other hand, 
receive Israeli citizenship by virtue of immigration on the basis of 
the law of return. In reality, however, any formation of independent 
Arab political or social association is not allowed, unless it is affili- 
ated with a Jewish or Zionist association, for example, Arab members 
of the Israeli Parliament. 

Senator Abourezk. Let me interrupt right there. 

I asked Professor Blum yesterday if Arabs are entitled to form their 
own political parties and he said yes. Is that time or not true? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. It is not true if we look at it from the way that they 
are arranging these kinds of parties. As I said just now, these parties 
should be affiliated to a Zionist or to a Jewish party. 

But they will not allow — although it is legal to let us form an inde- 
pendent Arab party. Here I want to indicate the independent Arab 
paity. I want to also mention that Mr. Blum yesterday — I was here 
in the hearing — used the word "list" — Arab list, and not "parties." 
The way that the election is taking place in Israel is this. The party 
will elect the first, second, third and so on persons on the list. These 
Arab parties that lie mentioned yesterday are affiliated with the Mapi, 
that is, the labor party. They will elect the person and classify his 
place on the list according to his reliability to the INIapi party. They 
will put the person in the first or second place. 

We do not have any independent Arab party that we can choose the 
people who will be presented or representing us. 

Senator Abourezk. So, in fact, what he said yesterday is not true ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. It is not true. There is no independent Arab party, 
but there are Arabs listed saying they are running and they are affil- 
iated with the Zionists. 


To illustrate this point, I shall refer to the case of the al-Ard — the 
land — movement, the latest of seven attempts to form independent 
Arab parties since the establishment of the State of Israel. 

Al-Ard movement, of which I was a founding member, was first 
organized during the late 1950's. It was made up of Palestinian Arabs 
and aimed at dealing with various social and political problems and 
grievances faced by the Arab community in the country. 

After much harassment by the authorities of the leading members 
of the movement, for example, internal exile, restriction of move- 
ment, the movement was finally outlawed in 1965. 

A more recent example of not allowing Palestinian Arabs in Israel 
to form their own social and political associations is the case of the 
Arab students in the country. Despite the fact that the Arab students 
in the six universities in the country have organized themselves in 
order to deal with their special problems which they are facing as 
Arabs, members of a national minority, in predominantly Jewish uni- 
versities, the authorities at the universities and the Ministry of Edu- 
cation of the State of Israel refuse to recognize these committees and 
their national Committee of Arab Students, and refuse to deal with 

This lack of recognition results in very real obstacles which are 
placed before the Arab students by the authorities. For instance, when 
the Arab students wish to hold cultural or intellectual events on 
campus, no room is provided for them for such purposes, while Jewish 
students do enjoy this privilege. 

One should only imgine not allowing Jewish students in American 
universities to hold Jewish cultural events using university facilities 
in order to appreciate the outcry about such discrimination and lack 
of freedom of association. Cases such as these are widely reported in 
the Hebrew press in Israel. 

As to the use of the defense — emergency — regulations, I am pleased 
by the fact that even Dr. Blum indicated his dislike of this set of 
laws. These laws were enacted in 1945 by the British Mandatory Gov- 
ernment and were used at the time against both Jews and Arabs. 

As a result, at the February 7, 1946, conference of the Lawyers' 
Association in Tel-Aviv — these are Jewish lawyers — in a collective 
attack on the regulations, the late Mr. Dov Yosef, later a minister in 
the Israeli Government stated : "With regard to the security regula- 
tions the question is: Will we all be subject to official terrorism?" 

And at the same meeting Mr. Ya'akov Shimshon Shapirah, who 
later became Israel's Minister of Justice, proclaimed: "The regime 
built in Palestine on the defense regulation has no parallel in any 
civilized nation. Even in Nazi Germany there were no such laws. * * * 
It is our duty to tell the whole world that the defense regulations 
passed by the government in Palestine destroy the very foundations 
of justice in this land." This appeared in Ha^raklit, February 1946, 
pages 58 to 64. 

These regulations provide the Israel authorities with the legal tool 
of administratively detaining people without official charges and with- 
out trials; restricting the movement of individuals; exiling people 
within the country and out of it; house arresting; collective punish- 
ments ; destruction of houses ; and confiscation of lands. These lands, 


incidentally, are considered by the authorities as redeemed lands. Their 
legal possession is, in most cases, transferred to the Jewish National 
Fund; thus legally, non-Jews, that is Palestinian Arabs, are not al- 
lowed to buy or lease these lands which are reserved for use exclusively 
by Jews. 

In fact, both I and my family have been direct victims of these regu- 
lations. My family's land was confiscated on the basis of these regu- 
lations; and I was detained for 15 months, and was house arrested for 
an additional 12 months without ever being charged of any wrong- 
doing and without ever being tried. 

In summary, the grave violations of human and civil rights of the 
Palestinian Arab population in the occupied territories are by no means 
unique to these areas alone. They have been, and still are being used 
against Palestinian Arabs within pre-1967 Israel boundaries. 

They, in my view, are an integral part of the Zionist colonial nature 
of the State of Israel, within which context they must be examined. 

Senator Abourezk. Thank you. 

What were the circumstances of your own imprisonment? 

Mr, Al-Asmar. At that time they came early in the morning — 3 
o'clock in the morning. They searched my house. They took me with 
them saying that I was suspect and that I had a relationship with the 
enemy. They specified that it was with the popular front. 

My answer was "OK. If you have evidence and you are claiming that 
I am living in a democratic state, then I am ready to go to court and 
accept what the court will say." 

Later on they said that I belonged to Fatah, but they never took 
me to court and they never presented evidence even to me to say why 
they were arresting me. 

In fact, I was arrested 3 weeks after my first book was published 
which had passed heavy censorship. I was asked about my poetry and 
about my writing. I think that is the main reason for putting me in 
jail for 15 months without charge. 

Senator Abourezk. Was the book one of poetry ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. A book of poetry, yes. 

Senator Abourezk. Did you criticize the Israel Government in it? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. Most of my poems are political poems. I usually 
write about our life and about our suffering. In fact, the book was cen- 
sored. I sent it to the censor and they canceled some poems and some 
lines from poems and even one word from a poem. 

After finally agreeing that I would publish it, then I published it. 
But later I was also asked about the book. 

Senator Abourezk. A book of poetry was censored? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. Yes. 

Senator Abourezk. How does that square with the statement by 
Professor Blum yesterday that Israel is the only democracy in the 
Middle East? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. That is his own problem. 

Senator Abourezk. That is his own problem ? 

Mr. Al- AsMAR. Yes, it is his own problem. 

It may be a democratic state for Jews, after which I also put a big 
question mark. But I cannot say that Israel is a real democratic state. 


Senator Abourezk. Is censorship exerted against Arabs and Jews or 
just Arabs? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. There are two kinds of military censorship. One 
belongs to any articles that are going to be published in any language 
in Israel. 

But there is another kind of censorship which belongs to the creation 
of the Arab writers in Israel. For example, a Jewish poet will not sub- 
mit his poetry to the censorship; but, at least at that time, we were 
not allowed to publish anything without submitting it to the censor, 
even if the poem was already published in a journal or newspaper and 
passed the censor before. If you want to put it in a collection, tlien you 
have to resubmit it again. 

From my own experience I have some poems that I published in 
newspapers. They did not allow me to publish them in a book. 

Senator Abourezk. You were in prison for 15 months without 
charge ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. Yes. 

Senator Abourezk. After that you were released and put under 
house arrest for 12 months ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. Yes. 

Senator Abourezk. Without charge ? 

Mr. Al- AsMAR. Yes. 

Senator Abourezk. In what year were you first arrested ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. I was arrested in 1969. 

Senator Abourezk. You were released when ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. November 1970. And from November 1970 I was 
under house arrest until November 1971. 

Senator Abourezk. How soon after that did you come to the United 
States ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. I came to the United States at the end of March 
1972. I was invited to come over and give a lecture tour about the 
Arabs in Israel. 

Senator Abourezk. Did you return to Israel or have you been here 
since then ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. I returned last year and I have been there a month 
ago to attend my father's funeral. 

Senator Abourezk. Are you living in the United States now ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. Now I am here. I am working on my Ph. D. 

Senator Abourezk. Do you plan to return to Israel ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. I will return to my fatherland because I belong 

Senator Abourezk. As soon as you finish your Ph. D. ? 

Mr. Al-Asmar. I hope so. 

Senator Abourezk. Well, I have no more questions. I want to ex- 
press my thanks to you for your testimony and your contribution. 

We have yet to hear from the administration witnesses. 

The hearings will be in recess, subject to the call of the Chair. 
[Whereupon, at 11 :45 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned.] 


Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Peesons 

IN Time of War 

August 12, 1949 

Article 49 

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected 
persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to 
that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their 


Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation 
of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons 
so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected 
persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material 
I'easons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. Persons thus evacuated 
shall be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in 
question have ceased. 

The Occupying Power undertaking such transfers or evacuations shall ensure, 
to the greatest practicable extent, that proper accommodation is provided to 
receive the protected persons, that the removals are effected in satisfactory 
conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and that members of the 
same family are not separated. 

The protecting Power shall be informed of any transfers and evacuations 
as soon as they have taken place. 

The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly 
exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or impera- 
tive military reasons so demand. 

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian 
population into the territory it occupies. 

Testimony of Alfred L. Atherton, Jr., Assistant Secretary of State for 

the Near East and South Asia 

Chairmen Fraser and Hamilton, members of the subcommittees, I am here to 
respond to your request for the State Department's views on the subject of 
Israel's settlements in territories occupied in the 1967 war. With your request, 
you forwarded a number of questions dealing with the legal, political and 
factual aspects of this subject. In this statement. I will review briefly the legal 
and politica' considerations that form the basis of our policy and touch on 
those questions relating to the relationship of the settlements to the future 
status of the occupied territories. Following my statement, I am at the Subcom- 
mittees' disposal to answer today, or subsequently in writing for the record, your 
questions on these and other aspects of this subject. 

the U.S. position 

The U.S. position on Israeli settlements in the occupied territories has been 
consistent since this subject first became an issue in 1968. 

There are two elements to our position : 

First, we have viewed those settlements as an obstacle to peace because their 
establishment could be perceived as prejudging the outcome of negotiations 
dealing with the territorial aspects of final peace treaties. 



United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 of November 1967 establishes 
the principles that peace must l>e based on withdrawal by Israeli armed forces 
from territories occupied in the 1967 conflict and the termination of all claims 
or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, 
territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and 
their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from 
threats or acts of force. In brief, Resolution 242 envisages Israel relinquishment 
of occupied territories in return for Arab agreement to recognize Israel's right 
to exist and to live in peace with it. 

The Arabs perceive Israel's settlements in the occupied territories as indicating 
that Israel intends to retain permanent control in the areas where the settle- 
ments are located and therefore as prejudging agreement in the negotiations on 
the location of the final secure and recognized boundaries called for in Resolu- 
tion 242. The Israeli Government has taken the position that all issues are 
negotiable and that the settlements will not be an obstacle to negotiations and 
peace. In our view, however, once settlements are established, they inevitably 
create psychological and political conditions which will make it more diflBcult 
to negotiate the final disposition of areas where they are located. This is espe- 
cially troublesome at a time when one of the main problems in launching peace 
negotiations is to persuade each side that the other intends to negotiate a 
settlement within the framework of Resolution 242. Thus, the settlements com- 
plicate the work of beginning the negotiations because they raise questions in 
Arab minds whether the negotiations, once begun, have a reasonable chance of 
succeeding. In this respect, they are analogous to statements from some Arab 
quarters which raise questions in Israeli minds whether the Arabs are really 
prepared to make genuine peace. 

Second, we see the Israeli settlements as inconsistent with international law. 

The Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Per.sons 
in Time of War, which contains many of the internationally recognized rules 
under which military occupation should be conducted, states in Article 49 the 
following : "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own 
population into the territory it occupies." 

Both Israel and its Arab neighbors are signatories of the Convention, although 
Israel maintains that it does not apply to any of the territories it has occupied 
since 1967, and that, in any case, it does not prohibit the establishment of 
settlements in occupied territory. We do not agree wuth this view of the Con- 
vention. In addition, we believe that under international law generally a bellig- 
erent occupant is not the sovereign power and does not have the right to treat 
occupied territory as its own or to make changes in the territory except those 
necessitated by the immediate needs of the occupation. In general, an occupant 
may only use the resources of the territory including public lands to meet the 
expenses of admini.stering the territory and the military needs of the army of 
occupation and for the direct benefit of the indigenous inhabitants. 


You have asked me to comment on the relationship between the settlements 
in occupied territories and the right of self-determination of the people of those 

To begin with, it is essential to understand an imnortant difference between 
th Sinai and the Golan Heights, on the one hand, and the West Bank and Gaza, 
on the other. 

Territory in the Sinai and the Golan from which Israel withdraws as a 
result of a negotiated agreement will dearly revert respectively to Egypt and 
Syria, whose sovereignty is not disputed. The issue of self-determination is 
therefore not germane in these two cases. 

In the West Bank and Gaza, however, the situation is different. Both of these 
territories were part of the British mandate of Palestine. While the legitimate 
existence of a sovereign Israel in part of Palestine is recognized, the question 
of sovereignty in the part of Palestine remaining out.side of Israel under the 
1949 Armistice agreements has not been finallv resolved. Jordan in May 1950 
declared that its annexation of the West Bank was without pre.ixidice to the 
final settlement of the Palestine issue, and Egypt did not make any sovereign 
claim to the Gaza Str'p during the time it was the administering authority there. 
Israel similarly notet the undefined nature of sovereignity in the West Bank 
and Gaza. 


The relationship between the settlements and the principle of self-determina- 
tion cannot be discussed in isolation, because the settlements are but a single 
factor involved in negotiating peace treaties that will provide among other things 
for the future of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In the view of the United 
States, the important thing concerning the future disixjsition of tJie West Bank 
and Gaza is that the arrangement be acceptable to the parties concerned. There 
is no clear consensus with respect to the question of whether, and if so how, 
self-determination might be expressed, or to the timing of such an expression. 
Whether such a consensus can be achieved in the negotiating process that lies 
ahead remains to be seen. This question, however, together with all the other 
complex issues of achieving peace in the Middle East, points up the importance 
of reconvening the Geneva Middle East Peace Conference so that the negotiating 
process can be resumed as soon as possible. We are now engaged in intensive 
diplomatic efforts to that end. 

[From the Jerusalem Post Rosh Hashana Magazine, Sept. 12, 1977] 
Visions, Plans and Realities 

Agriculture Minister Ariel Sharon has been putting forward anvbi- 
tioiis plans for Jeicish settlement in the territories. Yosef Goell con- 
siders them in the light of prospects for peace with the Arabs, rela- 
tions tcith the U.S., and Sharon's vision of the Israel of the future. 

How serious is all the talk about new settlements across the hypothetical 
green line which separates pre-1967 Israel from the territories it took over in 
the wake of the Six Day War? The question is apposite, for it would seem that 
Israel's settlement plans — and action.s — have come to dominate the view taken 
of Israel by foreign chanceries, and by foreign media and the public opinion they 
shape, ever since the advent to power of tlie Begin Government over three months 

Any attempt to assess what is happening in this field is confusing. One finds 
oneself in a morass of differing statements of intent, of much talk and little if 
any action, of uneasiness about plans being concocted behind the scenes. Consider 
the following : 

Mr. Begin's first act following his electoral victory was to appear at the Gush 
Emunim settlement of Elon Moreh at Kaddum to promise that there would be 
many more Elon Morehs. 

Shortly thereafter. Gush Emunim announced that by September 1 they 
would have people settle in 12 more sites in Samaria and Judea. They were only 
awaiting the go-ahead sign from the new and favourably inclined Begin Govern- 

On September 1, the Gush Emunim leaders, mindful of the date, held a press 
conference at which they expressed disappointment at the government's failure to 
implement these settlement plans and half promised, half threatened, that they 
were determined to have them in place "by the end of the summer." This deadline 
has since been interpreted to mean the intermediate days of Succot. 

Agriculture Minister Arik Sharon, who heads the joint Government-Jewish 
Agency Settlement Committee, subsequently declared that Gush Emunim and the 
government were in agreement on settlement policy and that there would be no 
confrontation between them. "They have been told, and fully understand, that 
settlements will be established only with si^ecific government approval," Mr. 
Sharon told The Post in an interview published last Friday. 

The question of timing is up to the government, Mr. Sharon emphasized. When 
pressed, he allowed that a substantial number of new settlements could be ex- 
pected to be set up within the next six months. He would not be pinned down 
to anything more specific than that. 

Hanan Porat, the head of Gush Emunim's settlement committee, in a descrip- 
tion of a typical week's activities published in Ha'aretz 10 days ago, wrote : 

". . . The Cabinet Secretary invited us to consider jointly how best to explain 
to the world the profound meaning that hityashvut (.settlement) has for us. The 
conversation was conducted in a friendly atmosphere ... In the evening we met 
with the Prime Minister . . . Several ideas were broached as to how best to ad- 
vance the cause of hityashvut, ideas which it would be best to keep secret ... I 
believe that a deep feeling of friendship has been established between us and Mr. 


As regards action, the Begin Government, in its two-and-a-half months of oflBce, 
has "legalized" tliree settlements established in Samaria under the Labour Gov- 
ernment, and announced its intention of going ahead with plans made by that 
government for an additional three settlements in Judea and Samaria. 


There are at least three contexts in which this question should be considered : 
the assumed effect of settlement plans and actions in the territories on the pros- 
pects for peace between Israel and the Arabs ; their effect on Israel's relations 
with the United States in the immediate future; and their relationship to the 
internal demographic, social, economic and political realities of Israel today and 
their impact on Israel's vision of itself in the future. 

Will further Israeli settlement across the green line prove prejudicial, indeed 
catastrophic, to the prospects for an Arab-Israel peace? 

To be perfectly objective about it, no one really knows. The diametrically op- 
posed opinions expressed on this question are actually something between sober 
assessments and wild guesses both dependent on opinion-holder's perception and 
interpretation of the causes and the present state of the Arab-Israel dispute. 

To those who believe, as parts of the American political community and media 
seem to, that leading elements of the Arab world are at last prepared to accept 
Israel, and that peace is around the corner if only the right formula can be found, 
the obvious answer is yes, settlement on the West Bank would spell finis to such 

Neither the present government, nor the Labour Governments since 1967, nor 
the overwhelming Israeli consensus, has ever accepted anything that comes close 
to such !in interpretation of the state of the Arab-Israel dispute. Arab hostility 
is seen in terms of total opposition to the existence of Israel, regardless of Israel's 
size. Given his view, it is difficult to see why Israeli expansion into Judea and 
Samaria should prejudice the prospects for peace any more than does the con- 
tinued retention of Haifa, Tiberias or Beersheba. 

To be sure, there are deep differences between moderate "doves" and the 
Greater "hawks" identified with the core of the present Likud-XRP Government 
on the settlement issue. But they are less over the assumed effect of settlement on 
the prospects for peace than over the question of absorbing or handling the mil- 
lion-plus Arab population that would accrue with the retention of the territories. 

The "dovish" attitude is that the forced incorporation of the 1.6 million 
Palestinian Arabs into an Israel of 3 million Jews would have catastrophic 
consequences for the nature of the society and polity that would constitute 
such an Israel ; that the very Jewishness and the democratic character of the 
state would be irreparably compromised. 

The "hawkish" reply is that even the doves are opposed, for security reasons, 
to returning the territories today. Given this tacit acquiescence in continued 
Israeli control, a crucial question is, who is to fill the void that exists on the 
West Bank? For the generally unknown fact is that a good part of the geo- 
graphical area known as Judea and Samaria, or the West Bank, is either empty 
of population or very sparsely populated. 

The Labour Government's Allon Plan was predicated on the proposition that 
the unpopulatefl Jordan Rift Valley, and the eastern slopes leading down to it 
from the heavily-populated spine of Samaria, would be incorporated into Israel, 
thus combining security advantages with those of annexing land without 

The Likud's Sharon is now seeking to expand the application of that approach. 
He argues that parts of the western slopes of Samaria are a'so thinly populated, 
and are even more crucial to Israel's security than the Rift Valley. 

The Likud Government is carrying on with its predecessors' policy of "thick- 
ening" the Jerusalem corridor with a string of agricultural and urban settle- 
ments. These will be connected by a new road to be pushed through from Beit 
Horon, .slightly north of Latrun. to the Atarot industrial area north of Jerusa- 
lem, and then down to Ma'ale Adumim. Both the Atarot and the Ma'ale Adumium 
projects were ])art of the Labour Government's Allon Plan concept. 

It is interesting and important to note that Arik Sharon is as emphatic as the 
Labour Alignment ever was about not pushing Israeli settlements into the 
heartland of the heavily populated mountain spine of Samaria. What is at issue, 
however, is the ultimate fate of the Arabs there. 


The moderates who support retention of the territories for security reasons 
see Israel as keeping the Arab areas in trust for an eventual settlement, no mat- 
ter how long delayed, in which this Arab heartland would be joined with a 
Palestinian Jordan. The Greater Israel hawks think of eventual annexation, 
when international politics permit. 

There is also an unarticulated hope ; that significant parts of this Arab popu- 
lation that will find itself a minority in a Jewish state will, somehow, fade 

But what of the very immediate and very insistent American opposition? 
There is good reason to believe that this will be the most decisive factor in 
regard to the actual implementation of settlement plans in the immediate future. 

Sharon speaks of this opposition as a passing phenomenon. By this he means 
the seven remaining years of the Carter Administration. But of course, no one 
can prophesy whether the Carter Administration will persist in this opposition 
throughout its term (or terms) of oflice, or what will be the attitude of a post- 
Carter administration. 

Arik Sharon's statement, however, is a good indication of how sensitive the 
present government is to American policies on this matter. 

This impression is buttressed by the passage quoted above from Hanan 
Porat's article regarding the government's concern about "explaining to the 
world the profound meaning" of hityashvut. Sharon's statement that new settle- 
ments would be established within six months, would seem to be based on ex- 
pectations of the pricking of the Geneva bubble by then, without Israel's being 
blamed by the Americans for the demise of their hopes for a solution in 1977, 
and of a subsequent mellowing of American attitudes. 

In this connection, Sharon's argument that Israeli settlement in Judea and 
Samaria actually works in favour of peace is interesting. It is, of course, open 
to the charge of being crass propaganda. But if that is what it is, it comes to 
counter the equally propagandist thesis that settlement is prejudicial to a 
peace that is within reach. 

An important element in the American equation that should not be overlooked 
is that of Gush Emunim. The major result of Gush activities, from Sebastia 
through Kaddum to its present plans for 12 settlements, has been to arouse 
foreign opposition. There would seem to be much truth in the argument that the 
intentional publicity that has attended the Gush Emunim exploits, such as their 
egregious marches through Arab villages in Samaria, has been the main factor 
behind the strengthening of the view abroad that settlements spell an end to 
peace hopes. 

Some Likud leaders admit as much, but are caught in the dilemma stemming 
from the very nature of the Gush. It could not continue to exist, much less main- 
tain the strength needed for the establishment of even a handful of settlements, 
without such publicity. 

This belief would seem to be strengthened by the virtual American silence 
about the recent establishment of new settlements in the Rafiah area in northern 
Sinai and the inauguration of the new city of Katzrin in the Golan. And this, of 
course, is the Labour Party's argument : that contrary to what the Likud claims, 
the Alignment did not neglect to settle the territories but carried it out with 
admirable and effective circumspection. 

The most important part of the question about the seriousness of the govern- 
ment's settlement plans, however, concerns the glaring gap between visions, plans 
and realities. 

Arik Sharon speaks of settling 2m. people out of a total Jewish population of 
6-8m. by the end of the century in a strip, parallel to the coast, extending from 
the Golan, through the Jordan Rift Valley, the Arava and down to Sharm 
e-Sheikh at the southern tip of Sinai. 

The reality, as he himself admits, is that after 10 years of settlement effort, 
there are fewer than 10,000 Israelis across the green line. The claim that a good 
many of the settlements in the Rift Valley are nearly empty, or very thinly 
occupied, was not just a piece of Alignment electioneering gaucherie, but a sorry 
fact. There are still about ten times as many Arabs in Jericho and neighbouring 
Auja as in all the 15 Israeli settlements in the valley. Kiryat Arba, further to 
the south, is one-third empty. 

In the much shorter term, he speaks of the great urgency of thickening the 
Jerusalem corridor; settling the western slopes of Samaria and the cross- 
Samaria highway which is to connect the coastal plain with the Rift Valley; 


rescuing the wide areas between Hebron and the Arad Valley from the deprada- 
tions of Arab poachers ; continuing the settlement of the Raflah gap, and seriously 
tackling the problem of the Jewish-Arab iwpulation balance in Galilee. The 
weakness here is that there is no reference to priorities among these many goals. 

To continue with the realities : Gush Emunim claims, at most, several hundred 
families who are ready to establish their 12 settlements. Sharon says that an 
additional several hundred young families have signed up to "go on hityashvut" 
as evidence of a reawakening of true patriotic and Zionist fervour. 

A few thousand souls who have indicated their intentions, but not done any- 
thing yet to implement them, are a fraction of the much larger numbers which 
have actually gone to settle under Labour Governments during the past 10 years. 
This hardly constitutes the revolution in attitudes required to move Israelis from 
the coastal strip to the parallel strip inland. 

Of course, there is always aliya. But last year, the number of immigrants 
totalled 21,000. There are no exact figures, but it is believed that the number 
of those who left the country as undeclared emigrants is close to that figure. This 
has been the case for the past three years. 

Cause for greater concern is the fact that few, if any, Jews who are seeking to 
leave such trouble spots as Argentina or South Africa are thinking of coming 
to Israel. This is a repetition of the behaviour of the much smaller community 
of Chilean Jewry which, when forced to leave Chile several years ago, chose not 
to come to Israel. And the drop-out rate among Jews leaving the Soviet Union has 
continued to be above 50 per cent for a good part of this year. 

Against this depressing background, the major debate which seems to be de- 
veloping around the question of the future of aliya is whether Aryeh Dulzin of the 
Jewish Agency or Absorption Minister David Levy will control their absorption. 

Is it serious? Not really. At least not yet. 

Mr. Sharon is absolutely correct in saying that Israel needs a guiding vision, 
and that the vision of a second surge of settlement activity could prove as ener- 
gizing for Israel and for the Jewish people as was the first, which seems to have 
run out of human steam some years ago. 

Arik Sharon is far from being the originator of this vision, but if he is to be 
its prophet in the new regime, one hopes that he is aware of a number of problems 
and ironies connected with its implementation under a Likud Government. 

Of all the factors involved in turning such a vision into reality — political con- 
straints, money, land and people — the last is the most important and the most 
problematic. People must be moved to participate in and carry through such a 
major project in continuing nation-building and that generally requires the 
inspiration of a movement. 

Irony number one is that of all of Israel's political movements Mr. Begin's 
Herut and its partner in the Likud, the Liberals, have historically been the 
furthest removed from Israel's first-stage settlement effort. Whether they will 
be able to organize a true movement that will enthuse and energize the countless 
thousands of Israelis and prospective immigrants without whom such a gar- 
gantuan project will remain nothing more than yellowing blueprints, remains 
to be seen. 

Arik Sharon is very close to the mark when he notes that, in order to get such 
a human movement off the ground and sustain its momentum, established Israel 
along the coastal plain will have to be deprived of its preferential suckling-place 
at the teats of the national treasury. One will have to await the return from 
the United States of Finance Minister Simcha Ehrlich and the entire Treasury 
elite, to canvass their opinion in the matter. In addition one cannot refrain from 
cynical thoughts concerning the views of the Likud's supporters in the Cities of 
the Plain. 

Mr. Sharon's potentially biggest ally in his declared intention of turning Israel 
around is the hityashvut movement — the kibutzim and moshavim — whose dedi- 
cated members constituted the human element of Israel's first settlement urge. 

The second irony is that this impressive human reserve is largely organized 
in the parties that oppose the present government. 

The success or failure of Arik Sharon's and the Begin Government's ambitious 
plans for the physical and political future of Israel partly may well depend on 
whether they are capable of overcoming the wall of mutual suspicion that exists 
between Israel's new rulers and her old pioneers. In a much larger sense it will 
depend on revolutionizing the relationship between Israel and the Jewish i)eople 
on the sore subject of aliya. 


[From the Jerusalem Post, Sept. 9, 1977] 
A Vision of Israel at Century's End 

(Ariel Sharon interviewed by Yosef Goell) 

"I admit it all sounds like a dream. But everything we have ever done started 
out as a dream." 

Thus spoke Arik Sharon, the pragmatic general, the Yom Kippnr War's "Arik 
King of Israel," today's Minister of Agriculture and more important, head of the 
joint Government-Jewish Agency Committee on Settlement. 

I had come to interview Arik on settlement plans, intending to begin with the 
(le rigueur question about his impending confrontation with the Gush Emunim. He 
insisted however, on shifting the burden of the interview to his vision of Israel 
at centurj-'s end and its implication for today's settlement policy. 

If one projects one's thoughts 20-30 years ahead, Arik says, the seemingly in- 
superable obstacles to further settlement in the territories assume their true 
proportions as passing problems. 

The main thing is to keep one's eye on an Israel with a Jewish population of 
6-8 million, at least two million of whom will reside in an inland strip parallel 
to the present coastal strip, and extendiiig from the Golan, through the Jordan 
Rift Valley, the Arava and down to Sharm el-Sheikh. 

Once you look at it that way, e^erJ thing else falls into place, he argues. 

But what do we do with American opposition to settlement in Judea and 

"It will change. Look, I welcomed the election of Jimmy Carter as president, 
and I still do ; I greatly resented pressures to which we were subjected by the 
Ford Administration. But at worst it (the Carter Administration) is a passing 
phase compared with our long-range goals ; it will be there for a maximum of 
eight years." 

Arik affects the same attitude towards the impact of the Geneva Conference, 
or last week's Arab Foreign Ministers conference, on the fate of his settlement 

Beneath this philosophical exterior, however, one senses that he's boiling. 

"Several days ago someone from the British Embassy contacted me with an 
urgent query from London as to whether it was true that Israel had established 
a new settlement near Jenin. 

"I told him, 'I didn't know that you still maintain a Colonial Office.' 

"It's really none of their business. Just like what they choose to do in Scotland 
is none of ours." 

Turning to politics, he charges it was the previous Labor Government that 
created a situation in which Israel became almost totally dei>endent on foreign 
approval or disapproval of its actions in its own domestic affairs. 

Obviously addressing himself to the foreign critics of the Begin Government's 
settlement policy — whose architect he is, and whose presumed builder he will 
be — Arik notes : 

"These plans are not prejudicial to the prospects of peace. To the contrary. 
The creation of bands of settlements through Judea and Samaria will give us 
a sense of .security for the first time, which in turn will permit us to entertain 
more daring solutions to the question of the Arab population than we can permit 
our.selves today." 

It is specifically such a settlement plan which will enable Israel to leave her 
options open in this regard, he argues. He insists that the Begin Government 
has no intention of expropriating privately owned Arab lands for the settlement 
projects, nor of pushing Israeli settlement into the areas of high Arab popula- 
tion density on the spine of the Samaria mountains between Jenin, Nablus and 

The Labor Government's Allon Plan concept, he points out, did not provide 
solutions for Israel's security needs, and would therefore in the long run have 
closed off such options. 

What are the plans of which he speaks? 

The basis for all the plans is the concept of leap-frogging from the coastal 
strip, which was the main site of Jewish settlement in the first century of 
settlement, to the parallel inland strip. 


"It all depends on what sort of Israel one envisions, an overcrowded, nervous, 
irritatinfc and e<'ologically sick strip of concrete along the coast, or an ecologi- 
cally liealthy country with a soinid distribution of its millions of inhabitants 
over a much larger area which will provide for basic security and a healthy econ- 
omy and society." 

THB plan's specifics 

Since the question was obviously rhetorical, we went on to consider the specifics 
of the plan calling for an eventual two million Jews living in the inland strip. 
The short term plans leading up to it concentrate much more on the connective 
tissue that makes up the area between the two strips. 

For Arik there are several points of great urgency : 

Tliickening the Jerusalem corridor so that it never again presents the lure 
to attack that it did in its narrower pre-1067 state. This means pushing an 
alternative road through from Beit Horon, slightly north of Latrun, to the 
Atarot industrial park between Jerusalem and Ramallah and then over the 
crest and down to the new industrial park and town being built at Maaleh 
Adumin, 15 kms, east of Jerusalem on the Jericho road. Settlements, especially 
of an urban, industrial and residential character are to be built along this road ; 

Connecting the coastal belt with the inland strip by means of a broad highway 
originating at about Petah Tikva, and going through the newly established settle- 
ment of Pe'erim (Mes'ha) through the biblical Shilo. which will be resettled, to 
the new regional centre of Maale Ephraim in the Jordan Valley foothills and 
down to the Valley road ; 

The foothill areas to the south of Hebron. Tliere. Arik says, Arabs from the 
Hebron area have taken over tens of thousands of dunams of state-owned land 
on both sides of the former green line, plowing, sowing and even building liomes. 
The only way to stop this poaching, he declares, is by establishing a string of 
I.sraeli settlements, of which Yattir will be the first ; 

(In an aside, Arik notes tliat over 10.000 Arabs are similarly encroaching on 
state-owned lands between Ashkelon and Hadera on 800 sites. "Something will 
have to be done about that," he mutters, and adds that the situation in Galilee, 
with Arabs taking over State-owned lands, is not much better. "One of the 
ab.surdities of our situation," he says, "is that over the past 10 years less than 
10,000 Jews have been settled across the green line and the world is in a tizzy ; 
but in the same i>eriod, over 30,000 Arabs from the territories have come -to re- 
side in Israel, including Jerusalem, and no one says a thing." 

Tlie western slopes of Samaria. Arik notes that as a result of the 1949 Armi.stice 
Agreements, Israel's narrow waist has been bounded on the east by a string of 
Arab villages from I''mm el-Fahm to Kafr Kassem. whose inhabitants today 
number close to 100,000. Immediately on the other side of the former green line 
is another band of dense Arab settlements in towns such as Tulkarm and 
Kalkilya and the villages in between, which also number close to 100,000 inhabi- 
tants. The danger, he says, is that this solid Arab block will grow to join the 
other area of dense Arab settlement on the mountain tops. This must be pre- 
vented by the insertion of a wedge of Israeli settlements in the sparsely popu- 
lated we.stern slopes. Tliis would consist of a line going from Dothan in the north 
through Shrom (Sebastia), Kaddum, Karnel Shomron, Pe'erim, Timnat Heres, 
Nebi Salah and Beit Horon. 

Tliese projects are the ones meriting greatest urgency, but the continuing 
settlement of the Golan, the Jordan Rift. Galilee, the Rafiah Gap and its connec- 
tion with Eilat will not be neglected, while the more urgent projects are being 
attended to. 

Where are all the settlers to come from? Gush Emunim will provide some, 
the other settlement movements others, and "there is also a most gratfiving 
rush of hundreds of young families who have already signed up with us for settle- 
ment projects." 

Sharon is especially encouraged by this latter ]>henomenon of youngsters from 
well-to-do homes, with good jobs and incomes deciding to accept the challenge of 
striking out in new directions. It is a good sign for the future realization of hi.s 
visions, he feels. 

But hi.s e.ves are set primarily on a resumption of large scale aliya of young 
Jews seeking new challenges. 

"Jews," he says, "will never come here for the purpose of living a materially 
more comfortable life than they can have in the galut. The.v will come if we offer 
tliem a challenge and a flag to follow." 


He feels that the idea of large scale settlement which will, he pluralistic enough 
to provide different forms and different challenges to different groups, is the 

Finally, getting to the Gush Emunini question which is on the tip of my tongue, 
Arik denies press reports that he was warned the Gush not to dare settle on their 
own without Government approval. 

"There is no confrontation between us and there will be none. The Gush under- 
stands that settlement is to be only on the basis of Government approval. The 
operative question is that of timing, and that will be decided by the Government." 

Other settlement movements will be encouraged to settle in accordance with 
their own ideological limitations, he says. If one movement refuses to settle in 
Samaria, but agrees to settle in the Golan, Galilee or Rafiah, they will be 

He feels that a significant number of American Jews and American Jewish 
communities will respond to the challenge of setting up independent settlements 
of their own. If, for example, American Jews want the chance of establishing a 
town of their own in Galilee according to their own ideas and their own stand- 
ards, the new government will give them that chance, he says. 

"The main thing is to get around the monster bureaucracy that has grown 
up around the whole settlement setup and free it from its shackles. That, and 
making sure that national resources are diverted from the coastal be't to the 
new projects inland. Admittedly its a difficult thing to do politically, but it will 
be done because it has to be done." 

What do Finance Minister Simha Ehrlich and the other Ministers have to say 
to what sounds like a bit of political naivete on the part of the new boy? 

Arik does not answer directly but goes over to speak of the atmosphere in 
which the Begin Government conducts its business. 

"These plans I've outlined have not yet been approved by the entire Cabinet. 
But there's no need for that at this stage. I've presented them to Prime Minister 
Begin and shown them to the other concerned ^linisters and all have approved. 

"The important thing to understand about this Government is that it has a 
clear line of its own. Because of that, and because Prime Minister Begin is the 
most authoritative Premier since Ben-Gurion, every one of the Ministers enjoys 
much greater autonomy in his field than was the case in the previous governments. 

"There is no backbiting or backstabbing among the Ministers, and we have 
been working in optimal harmony and coordination. In my capacity as Minister of 
Agriculture I meet with the two other economic Ministers, Finance Minister 
Ehrlich and Industry Minister Hurvitz, weekly, and we get along fine." 

The autonomy Sharon speaks of has been great enough to permit him to lord 
it over his Joint-Commitee on Settlement, and to withhold details of his plans 
from its Jewish Agency members, most of whom are Labor Party appointees. As 
far as I could learn he has the Prime Minister's support in this policy in the 
interests of maintaining maximum secrecy on what they consider to be a very 
sensitive .subject. 

The same was true of the interview. It was difficult to learn whether there are 
fully detailed plans for the establishment of settlements in accordance with the 
general guidelines outlined above, or whether the whole matter was still one of 
rather empty ideological posturing. 

"Make no mistake about it," Arik brought us out of our heretical reveries, "This 
Government will establish many new .settlements. That's what it was elected to do 
and that's what it will do." (There was no im yirtze hashem — 'God Willing' — 
which has become a required appendage to declarative sentences uttered by Begin 
Government ministers.) 

"The former Government did not recognize the right of all Jews to settle in all 
parts of Eretz Yisrael. This government does. We will not allow the situation to 
go on under which Arabs were permitted to reside anywhere in our land, but 
Jews were not. 

"I and my plan do not repre.sent an extreme iwsition. To the contrary, I am 
ready, as I explained, to consider different options for a solution of the problem 
of this country's Arabs. The condition for such flexibility is that we neutralize 
the danger to our security. This is what the Allon Plan concept failed to do, and 
what our plan provides for. 

"We are also basing ourselves on the belief that Jews and Arabs can live 
together in peace. I have believed this ever .since I was a child, and continue 
to believe so today. What has changed is that now I am in a position to try to 
do something to prove it." 


Israeli Land Acquisition In Occupied Territory, 1967-77 

(By John Ruedy') 

This paper represents a first, and as yet incomplete, attempt by the author to 
take an overview of Israeli land acquisition in territories conquered from the 
Arabs in 1967. It also attempts to relate that acquisition to a larger process of 
Jewish land appropriation which began three quarters of a century ago. There 
is much more research to be done before the tentative findings contained below 
can be considered definitive. 

Under the infiuence of the intellectual inputs of the second aliya of 1904-14, 
the emerging Zionist ethos began to reserve a central, even primordial place 
for ownership and cultivation of land. While no more than 19 percent of Jewish 
settlers in Palestine have at any one time been residents on the land, the kib- 
butzim and similar institutions are ensconced in the emotional and intellectual 
heart of Zionism. From a more practical point of view, Zionist leadership de- 
termined as early as 1910 that reliable and permanent political control could 
only exist when the land was juridicially, economically, and actually under 
Jewish control. 

By 1950, the Conciliation Commission for Palestine estimated that Jews in the 
77 percent of Mandate Palestine that had become Israel held some 640,000 hec- 
tares of cultivable land. Of this total, some 457,400 hectares, or 72 percent, had 
been Arab owned or occupied two years before. It is instructive to look briefly at 
how this transformation came about. 

Using Zionist figures supplied to the United Nations Special Commission on 
Palestine in 1917, Jews on the eve of Israeli statehood were in possession of 
about 180,000 hectares of land in all Palestine. That area represented between 
9 percent and 12 percent of the cultivable land in the country. Some of this land 
had been assigned to Jews by the British authorities out of reserves of state 
land. Most of it had been purchased over the years by Jewish agencies and indi- 
viduals. A good portion, though by no means all, was purchased from absentee 
landowners. With the enormous immigration pressures occasioned by Hitler's 
rise to power in 1933, Jewish purchasing agents began to offer what appeared 
to Palestinian owners of the time as astronomical prices. An interesting aspect 
of Jewish National Fund land policy was the decision from about 1936 to use 
the pattern of land purchases to attempt to create "facts" to weigh on possible 
future political decisions. When it became clear to the Zionist leader.ship that 
some form of partition of Palestine was a distinct po.ssibility. emergency meas- 
ures were taken to establish Jewish toeholds in districts that until then had 
little or no Jewish settlement. This establishment of landed "facts" is a theme 
that recurs even more dramatically after 1967. 

By virtue of their 1948 victory Zionists fell heir to the legal apparatus of the 
state, which in turn permitted them to enter into possession of all but 53,000 
hectares of cultivable land within their lines. Firstly they inherited the Man- 
date's public domain, a not inconsiderable portion of which consisted of land 
actually farmed or used for grazing by Arabs. Secondly, they took over an enor- 
mous amount of land owned by Arabs who had fled or were driven beyond Jewish 
lines and whom they did not subsequently permit to return. Forty percent of 
land owned by Arabs w^ho were still in Israel was also appropriated and assigned 
to a Custodian of Abandoned Property. Bv far the lararest part of the property 
acquired by the Jewish State in the late 1940's or earlv 1950's was property owned 
by Arabs and classified by the state as vacant or abandoned. 

A third, widely-used technique of land acquisition was the use of the power 
of expropriation. Expropriation for the benefit of projects of public interest, 
e.g., school, roads, post oflSces with subsequent indemnification of those expropri- 
ated is a recognized prerogative of the modern state. In Israel it was determined 
that the establishment of Jewish .settlements of one kind or another or the 
consolidation of or rounding out of existing holdings was, in fact, in the public 
interest. Arabs were deprived of property at fixed 1950 prices even many years 
after 1950 so that Jews could be settled in their places. While some Palestinians 
accepted the compensation offered, many would not, wishing to avoid definitively 
signing away their rights. In these cases expropriation amounted in fact to 

^ Dr. Rued.v is Professor of History at Georgetown University. 


A final technique was the imposition of ex post facto legal tests of land 
ownership. In order to regularize what the Israelis perceived as a confused land 
tenure situation, a law required all Arab proprietors to produce deeds of owner- 
ship or other proof of continuous holding of a property for the past 15 years. 
Many small holders could produce neither and subsequently lost their houses, 
gardens, farms or shops. 

Ten years ago in Land Policy in Colonial Algeria I examined the techniques 
used by French settlers to appropriate the landed wealth of Algeria before 
the middle of the 19th century. The degree of similarity that exists between the 
techniques of European land appropriation in Palestine in the 20th century and 
those employed a century earlier in the Maghrib is striking. In the course of 
the war brought about by the coming of the Europeans, large segments of the 
native population flee or are driven away ; one then seizes as vacant or 
abandoned or as enemy property, the lands so deserted. One also completely 
disrupts local property markets and values by offering prices several times what 
the local market is accustomed to. One creates ex post facto criteria to determine 
the legality of tenures. One mobilizes the expropriation powers of the state in 
order to settle members of the ruling ethnic group in place of the ruled. Utilizing 
a totally Western concept of proprietorship, one evicts from public domain lands 
peasants and pastoralists who have occupied them for generations. 

The pattern of Israeli land acquisition in the territories occupied since 1967 
is one that continues essentially the objectives and techniques of the earlier 
period. Political realities have, however, brought about modification in the 
modalities of implementation of land policy. To understand the pattern of the 
last ten years one must recall briefly the international and domestic political 
contexts in which land acquisition has taken place. 

Firstly, the international consensus as expressed in Security Council Resolu- 
tion No. 242 of November 1967, after stating the inadmissibility of the acquisition 
of territory by force, called upon the Israelis to withdraw from territories 
occupied in the conflict. The United States, Israeli's chief world sponsor, adhered 
to the resolution, and for 10 years has continued to reiterate that any boundary 
changes would be insubstantial and would not reflect the weight of conquest. 
Secondly, the domestic political reality for Israel was that as early as 
December 1967, public opinion polls showed a majority of Israeli Jews in favor 
of retaining all or almost all the occupied territories. The religious right wing 
then as now spearheaded this irredentist or expansionist sentiment, but it was 
not limited to that group. At the same time a minority on the left favored trading 
territory for peace. 

Governments of Israel have traditionally been coalitions dominated but not 
completely controlled by the Labor Party. The governments were buffeted be- 
tween the requirements of the religious elements of the coalition and those of 
the more conciliatory elements. At the same time the governments could not 
afford too openly to flaunt the international consensus favoring withdrawal for 
fear of embarrassing or even alienating Israel's chief sponsor and protector. 

It is only against the background of these competing pressures that one can 
begin to understand the circumspect way in which the succeeding governments 
of Eshkol, Meir and Rabin pursued the acquisition of Palestinian and other 
occupied Arab land until June 1977. The Allon Plan of settlement was first articu- 
lated only two months after the June War. Caught hetwen maximalist, mini- 
malist, world and U.S. opinion, no Israeli government ever officially accepted the 
Allon Plan. For maximalists, acceptance of the plan would have implied Israeli 
alienation of an important part of the national patrimony. For others it would 
have implied rejection of the world consensus that favored withdrawal. Yet, in 
accord with the Allon Plan, succeeding Israeli cabinets between 1967 and 1977 
implemented what came to he known as the "Oral Law", a verbal agreement 
amongst key leaders of the Party with the following elements : ( 1 ) Permanent 
Israeli presence on the Golan Heights; (2) holding a line from El Arish on the 
Mediterranean to Ras Muhammad on the Red Sea ; (3) holding Sharm al Shaykh 
and a land link to Eilat ; (4) a security zone around Jerusalem, in the Latrum 
Bulge and south of Bethlehem ; (5) a security border at the Jordan River cutting 
the populous heartland of the West Bank off from military support from the east. 
The lines would l>e secured by planting colonies of various types and sizes along 
the perimeters defined by the plan. 

By mid-1976 there were some 68 settlements of different kinds, holding, by 
unofficial count, about 15,000 people. There were 25 settlements in the Golan 

20-488 O - 78 - 9 


Heights; 17 in the Jordan Valley; (6) clustered around the Latrum Bulge, 
Jerusalem and south around Bethlehem ; and 17 in Gaza and Sinai. There were 
also the irregular settlements at Hebron and Xablus established by the religious 
militants of the Gush Emunim. 

One is struck by the perseverance and consistency with which a series of three 
governments, none of which ever adopted the plan, nevertheless labored to make 
it a reality. Terence Smith in a 1976 New York Times article estimated that 
Israel had by then spent at least $500 million on settlements— an enormous sum 
for a state in Israel's financial condition. The AUon Plan, sanctioned informally 
by the leadership of the dominent political party, was pursued doggedly in the 
face of numerous objections from Palestinians, Arab governments, the United 
Nations and the United States. The governments of Israel justified the settle- 
ments on the basis of their contribution to the security of the state and re- 
peatedly maintainetl that their existence could not be construed as Israeli expan- 
sion or as contrary to the letter or spirit of Security Council Resolution 242. 

The properties for these settlements were acquired in a variety of ways. Firstly, 
the Syrian, Jordanian, and Egyptian public domains fell to the Israelis by virtue 
of the conquest. In the West Bank that public domain amounted to about 80,000 
hectares, or about one sixth of the land surface of the region. Some was desert or 
mountain land, some was built up area, but a considerable jwrtion was used for 
farming or grazing. Secondly, there was a con.siderable amount of "Abandoned 
Property" of refugees from the 1967 war or later periods or of deportees, mount- 
ing to about 32,000 hectares in the West Bank and a considerable amount in the 
Golan Heights as well. Where public domain lands and abandoned lands were 
insufficient to the needs of settlement, the Israel Land Authority could sometimes 
purchase directly to acquire what it wanted. More frequently, however, it re- 
sorted to expropriation. These are expropriations entered into without benefit of 
public hearing and without prior consultation with the community or individuals 
concerned. As often as not, notice of intention to expropriate is of very short 
duration. Sometimes there is no advanced notice. It appears that in a consider- 
able majority of cases expropriation amounts in practical terras to confiscation, 
since most Palestinians do not accept the compensation offered by the Land 
Authority. They do not accept it for one or a combination of reasons. Some fear 
that accepting compensation might make them liable under Jordanian Law 
which makes sale of land to Israelis a capital offense. Others out of solidarity 
with their communities and the national cause refuse to accept compensation. 
Perhaps the majority refuse Israeli money because they do not want to sign away 
forever claims to properties they do not want to give up. 

One irony of the situation, though, is that the Israelis early on came to know 
that most Palestinians would not accept their compensation. They have come to 
count on getting most of their expropriations free ; in many ways this Palestinian 
fear, patriotism or attachment to land, by making settlement less costly for the 
colonists, facilitates the achievement of Israeli goals and the alienation of the 
Arab patrimony. 

The implementation of the Allon Plan represents the most apparent, least 
concealable level of Israeli territorial acquisition. At another level one en- 
counters acquisition motivated by militant and expansionist nationalism which 
is \mdergirded for many Israelis by a traditional religious sanction. This views 
the Golan Heights, the West Bank, Gaza, and even parts of Sinai as liberated 
Jewish territory to be "reincorporated" thoroughly and permanently into "Eretz 
Israel". As one Israeli minister said recently in connection with the legalization 
of the Camp Kadum settlement at Nablus, "How can you annex the land of 
Israel to the people of Israel?" So, while at the overt level the never officially 
adopted Allon Plan is doggedly pursued and defended to the outside world and 
to Israeli doves as necessary for national security, at a quieter level, organs of 
the same state and citizens of that state are pursuing a much more inclusive 

There has been an enormous amount of land acquired by private Israeli 
citizens and by non-Israeli Jews, especially in the Jeru.salem area, where a 
number of speculative fortunes have been made. The involvement of high govern- 
ment officials in some of this speculation led to a scandal a few years back. 

More importantly, the National Fund and the Israel T>and Authority 
since 196S have l«>en quietly buying land all over the West Bank at a rate that 
seems to have accelerated at least until the spring of 1976, when some observers 


think it began to slow. These purchases never were limited to the perimeters of 
the AUon Plan. As one Israeli official said, "We will buy any land, anywhere, at 
any price, and in any currency." 

The existence in a general way of this active purchasing program of the Land 
Authority and the Jewish National Fund has been an open secret for many years. 
In March 1976 Israel State Radio even aired a program on it. But in specifics 
little is known. The government often uses intermediaries to cover its purchases 
so that the seller does not know he has sold to Israelis. Transactions are not 
publicly recorded. Neither the Israel Land Authority nor the Military Governor 
of the West Bank will release figures of any kind on the transactions. As a 
result of this quieter program of acquisition, Israelis own property in Ramallah, 
Hebron, Nablus, Tulkarm, Jericho and all over the populated heartland of the 
West Bank — land whose situation bears no relation at all to the settlement pat- 
terns of the Allon Plan or to the de facto settlements of the religious militants. 
Is it possible to quantify the results of Israeli land acquisition programs since 
1967? — only partially and imperfectly in the present state of our knowledge. For 
the Golan Heights the answer is vSimple. By acquiring the Syrian public domain 
and by occupying a region devoid of nine tenths of its population, the Israelis 
came to own most of the land outright. Most of the settled population left the 
Sinai as a result of the 1967 hostilities. Israeli authorities have assumed the 
right to evict Bedouins from their holdings at will when lands they occupy are 
needed for Jewish settlement there. Gaza is a more complex case; but a few 
thousand hectares have been acquired there through the forced resettlement of 
Palestinian refugees in new Sinai quarters. 

On the West Bank Israel has acquired the Jordanian public domain of 
80,000 hectares, 32,000 hectares of property "abandoned" by refugees or deportees, 
and at least 16,000 hectares of exproporiated land. The effort to quantify the 
purchases presents the most difficulties. According to Israel State Radio, state 
agencies and the Jewish National Fund sjient about $7,000,000 on land acquisi- 
tions in 1975. If that figure is representative and if $2,000 per hectare is an 
average price, in nine years the Land Authority and Jewish National Fund had 
bought some 30,000 hectares. As of mid-1977, the total of Israeli land ownership 
on the West Bank is probably about 160,000 hectares, almost exactly one third 
of the land surface of the West Bank. 

The Zionist movement is moving steadily toward control of the land which 
has been an essential part of its ethos for three quarters of a century. If one 
uses as a base figure the total land surface of Mandate Palestine, one discovers 
that Arabs today — in Israel and the occupied territories of Gaza and the West 
Bank— still hold about 380,000 liectares, or 19%. Israelis hold 1,640,000 hectares, 
or slightly more than 81%. In Israeli terms, "conquest of the land" has been 
met with stunning success. 


[From the Jerusalem Post Rosh Hashana Magazine, Sept. 12, 1977] 

Settlement at the Crossroads 

After a decade of close coordination, the two major bodies plan- 
ning settlement in rural areas appear to have reached a parting of 
the ways. Abraham RaMnovich looks at the plan of the Jeivish 
Agency's Settlement Department, and compares it with the pro- 
gramme outlined recently by the chairman of the Ministerial Settle- 
ment Committee. 

Beginning in almost offhand fashion as a grassroots movement, settlement 
across the pre-1967 border has develoned in the past 10 years into high policy 
touching on cardinal questions of Israel's future. 

At the end of July, 1967, members of Galilee and Jordan Valley settlements 
began moving into army installations on the Golan Heights abandoned by the 
Syrians little more than a month before. Their object was to "create facts" and 
ensure that a permanent ci^ilian Israeli presence would be established on the 
heights which had so long been an omnious threat looming over them. 

Such a presence was hardly a foregone conclusion at the time. "People were 
still thinking in terms of the Sinai Campaign when we pulled back after a 


few months," recalls Meir Shamir, who wias to become the settlement official 
in charge of coordination on the Golan. 

Government policy would probably have evolved in due course, in the direo 
tion of settlement ; but the partisan efforts certainly prodded it into movement 
earlier. In the case of Kiryat Arba, Rabbi Moshe Levinger and his followers 
squatting in a Hebron hotel pushed the government into doing something it had 
at first explicitly opposed — creating a Jewish urban settlement in Hebron. 

The young men whose fathers had been killed or captured in the fall of the 
Etzion Bloc to the Arab Legion 19 years earlier began petitioning government 
officials for permission to resettle on that West Bank site almost as soon as the 
Six Day War ended. By the end of September, 1967, the government agreed to 
the establishment of a para-military Nahal settlement at Gush Etzion. 

In the same month, the authorities decided to assist the settlers who had gone 
up on their own to the Golan Heights. A month later, the first schematic plan for 
official settlement on the Golan was drawn up. Similar planning was also begun 
for the other territories beyond the green line, that marked the border on the 
pre-1967 maps of Israel. 

The post-1967 period has seen the greatest thrust in settlement building since 
the days of mass immigration following the establishment of the state, when 
some 350 settlements were established in five years. 

The pace of the early '50s had gradually tapered off and on the eve of the 
Six Day War there were hardly any garinim — settlement groups — waiting to go 
up on the land. In the three years preceding the war, only five new settlements 
were established. In the 10 years since, 113 settlements have been established, 
77 of them across the green line. The densest concentration, numbering 26, is on 
the Golan Heights. A close second is the lower Jordan Valley, including the 
eastern slopes of Samaria, with 21 settlements. 

The Etzion Bloc now has seven settlements and there are three others at 
other points on top of the West Bank hills. The Rafiah area, including the 
southern tip of the Gaza Strip, has 17 existing or under construction, and the 
east Sinai coast south of Ellat has three. 

Most of the settlements are traditional moshavim or kibbutzim ; but a dozen 
are Nahal settlements which have not yet been "civilianized." Four on the Golan 
are designated civilian "outposts" and six are urban settlements. 

Within the green line, 36 settlements have been established in the past decade 
in the Galilee, Arava, Bsor region and elsewhere. 

Thousands of would-be settlers are organized today in garinim. In contrast 
with the European town dwellers who foimded the early kibbutzim and the im- 
migrants from Islamic countries who were settled in the post-1948 moshavim 
most of the new settlers are youths bom in kibbutzim and moshavim. 

These second-generation farmers are capable of applying modem agro-tech- 
niques without the painful years of trial their parents had to undergo. Tliis is 
one of the principal reasons that the settlements are able to become self- 
sufficient — indeed, — sometimes highly profitable — within a very few years. 

The primary vehicle for rural settlement for the past half century has been 
the Settlement Department of the Jewish Agency. It maintained its role even 
after the founding of the state. With the domination by the Labour movement 
of both the government and the Agency, an identity of political outlook was 

For legal reasons, operative responsibility for settlements beyond the green 
line after 1967 was given to the Settlement Department of the World Zionist 
Organization (WZO) which is nearly identical in its personnel with that of the 
Agency's Settlement Department. Since 1970, decisions on settlements beyond 
the green line are made by a body commonly known as the Ministerial Com- 
mittee on Settlement but actually composed of an equal niunber of government 
ministers and members of the WZO. 

The advent of a Likud administration has snapped the organic political ties 
between the government and the WZO. Each has now drawn up its own settle- 
ment plan. The head of the Ministerial Settlement Committee, Ariel Sharon, has 
presented hi.s plnn to Prime Minister Begin. Prof. Ra'anan Weitz, head of the 
WZO Settlement Department, will present his plan to the Zionist Congress in 

The WZO plan, based on extensive professional knowledge, is likely to form 
an important element in the government's overall approach to settlements even 


though the government undoubtedly intends to go beyond it as far as West 
Bank settlement is concerned. 

Following is the first public look at the WZO settlement proposal for 1977- 

Where two-thirds of new settlements in the last 10 years were established 
across the green line, Weitz proposes concentrating two-thirds in Israel proper 
during the next 15 years. This reversal of emphasis in part reflects limita- 
tions of arable land and water across the green line. It also reflects Weitz' 
political views, which dictate the avoidance of settlement in the heavily- 
populated areas of the West Bank. 

Out of the 186 settlements to be established in the period, Weitz proposes 
49 for the territories. Of these, 20 are designated for the Rafiah area, 10 for the 
Golan Heights, four for the eastern Sinai coast and 15 for the West Bank, in- 
cluding the lower Jordan Valley, Judea and the slopes of Samaria. 

To know the precise difference between what Weitz and Sharon have in view 
for the West Bank — and the only significant difference between them appar- 
ently, concerns the West Bank — we must wait for a detailed presentation of 
their respective plans. Both have thus far refrained from spelling out the 
precise sites they have in mind. 

Both propose a line of settlement running from north to south on the west- 
ern edge of Samaria which borders Israel's narrow waist and population 
centres. Weitz' settlements, however, would straddle the green line and ap- 
parently penetrate it eastward no more than two or three kilometres. Sharon 
indicated on a map during a television interview last Friday that this north- 
south line would be higher up in the foothills but still short of the crest of 
the central hill chain. 

The difference between Sharon's line and Weitz' is probably only a few 
kilometres ; but the West Bank is so narrow that the difference on a map is 
significant — especially considering that most of the opposite — eastern — slopes 
of Samaria are designated by both men for Jewish settlements. 

This leaves only the spine of the hills — perhaps 30-40 km. wide — as an area 
of predominantly Arab settlement. But while Weitz would refrain from in- 
troducing Israeli settlements here except around Jerusalem and the Etzion 
Bloc, Sharon would create three urban centres on the crest outside the Jeru- 
salem area — one between Bethlehem and Hebron and two at the northern 
end of the West Bank. He may have smaller settlements in mind as well to 
straddle an east-west road he proposes pushing through the heart of Samaria. 

Weitz' settlement plan for the next 15 years envisions three major thrusts, 
which he calls the Southern Project, the Eastern Project and the Northern 

It is the Northern Project, settlement of the Galilee, that he speaks of with 
the greatest sense of urgency. 

"There is a real danger of the Galilee not being an integral part of the 
country," he says. Living in the Galilee hills today are 62,000 Jews and 160,000 
Arabs and other minorities. Between Arab Nazareth and the Lebanese border 
there is no Jewish settlement. 

The WZO plan calls for 41 new settlements in the Galilee by 1992. To over- 
come the shortage of arable land, Weitz has proposed a new settlement concept — 
a communal village based on light industry. The first such settlements are 
already being developed. 

The Eastern Project, embracing the Golan, lower Jordan Valley, Arava (in- 
side the green line) and the eastern Sinai coast, envisions 29 new settlements 
in the next 15 years and is plainly in support of political objectives. 

Major emphasis is given to the Southern Project, which overlaps the green 
line. Its area extends from Rafiah almost to Beersheba. Climate and soil con- 
ditions make this an ideal region for the growth of profitable winter vegetables 
for Europe. In the coming 15 years, 94 settlements would be built in the area, 
20 of them across the green line, the rest in Israel proper. 

As a central principle, Weitz' plan avoids the populated areas of the West Bank 
and Gaza Strip. 

"History shows that you can live in peace provided you are separate," he says. 
"Catholic Ireland could coexist with Protestant Ulster. But an Ulster in which 
large numbers of Catholics live with a Protestant majority is a wound that will 
never heal. Cyprus won't heal unless it's divided. 


"In Galilee, our solution must be to have a preponderance of Jews, with a 
very small Arab minority. But in the West Banli and Gaza we will never have an 
overwhelming preponderance, even if we have an immigration of 100,000 a year. 
The solution must be separation of the population while holding on to the stra- 
tegic lines — ^along the Jordan, for Instance — on which our fate depends." 

[From the Jerusalem Post Rosh Hashana Magazine, Sept. 12, 1977] 

A New Concept 

Development of the industrial village, or kafat, represents a 
'turning point' in the concept of settlement, Dr. Ra'anan Weitz, 
head of the Jewish Agency's Settlement Department, tells The Post's 
Abraham Rabinovich. 

New agricultural techniques, new military realities and new social visions are 
revolutionizing the character of rural settlement, which has shaped this country 
and much of its leadership during the past half century. 

Dr. Ra'anan Weitz is the prophet of this revolution. He is one of its major 
architects as well. 

"Rural settlement is at an historic turning point," says Weitz, who as head of 
the Settlement Department of the Jewish Agency is one of the country's fore- 
most authorities on the subject. 

The founders of Zionist .settlement policy 60 years ago realized "explicitly or 
otherwise," he says, that the border of the future Jewish state would be deter- 
mined by the pattern of rural settlement. They conceived .settlements as self- 
contained units dispersed so as to dominate as much .space as possible. In this 
context, the settlements were referred to as "points" nekudot. 

Their significance was not just political but military. The settlements came to 
be seen as strong points in a static defence or as jumping off points for offensive 
operations, in any conflict to come. 

These concepts proved themselves in tlie War of Independence. The new 
state was to be shaped by the settlement pegs driven into the soil at places like 
Hanita, on the Lebanese border, Tirat Zvi in the Beit She'an Valley and Yad 
Mordechai on the Gaza approaches. Militarily, the settlements played the key 
blocking role envisioned for them. Only a handful of the far-flung nekudot fell to 
Arab attack. 

Economically, the object of the settlements was to make the Je\\ish yishuv 
as self-sufficient in food as possible. It was a modest goal compared to the achieve- 
ments which have made Israel one of the foremost agricultural innovators in the 
world. Today, the productivity of Israel's farmers is among the highest in the 
world — 5 per cent a year. 

Socially — and this was the initial impetus of the Zionist programme — the object 
of rural settlement was to create a new Jew, a man of the soil, free of the men- 
tality of the Diaspora. Here too a success of epic proportions has been achieved. 

By the eve of the Six Day War close to 600 farming settlements had absorbed 
not only city dwellers from the West but tens of thousands of immigrants from 
Islamic countries with no agricultural skills and little education. 

"In one generation," says Weitz of the latter, "a deep, amazing transforma- 
tion took place. We achieved something deemed to be impossible." The bulk of 
these immigrant settlements now stand on their own feet economically, and a 
new Israel-bred generation is beginning to take over. 

As magnificent as these successes have been, the past few years have brought 
new realities which require a totally new approach to rural settlement, says 
Weitz, Militarily, exposed settlements are more of a burden than an asset when 
Israel's armies rely on highly mobile armoured forces. Politically, says WVitz, 
Israel cannot expect friends to support its claim to territory just because it has 
built settlements on it. But settlements can buttress Israel's claim to territory 
while it can demonstrate to be vital to its .'^e^'urity needs. 

Instead of isolated nekudot, settlements are now built in clusters (eshkolot) 
which can sustain a high level of technical, cultural and social services. 

Economically, the very success of Israeli farming had, until recentlv. seemed 
to preclude the heed for any more agricultural settlements, since the growth 
in productivity was higher than the growth in local consumption. However, the 
development in the past five years of "super-specialized" farming and "con- 
trolled agriculture" involving glasshouses and other enclosed structures has 
opened what Weitz says are "possibilities no one ever dreamed of" in the growth 


of winter vegetables for the tables of Europe. The small amount of water and 
land needed to support a family at a high standard with this kind of farming 
would have seemed fantastic five years ago, says Weitz. 

These developments permit him to envision 150 new settlements on what had 
seemed until a few years ago the sandy wastes of the northwestern Negev and 
Rafiah approaches. Unlike mixed farming, this is a type of agriculture requiring 
very high investments and a high level of skill. 

The most far-reaching change in rural settlement has nothing to do wdth agri- 
culture. It is the concept of the industrial village. Although it may seem a prosaic 
innovation, Weitz believes it offers a solution not only to a specific Israeli prob- 
lem, but to some of the most fundamental problems of Western civilization. 

The concept was developed in the Settlement Department. In its search for 
methods of establishing settlements in areas like the hill country of the Galilee 
where there was insuflScient arable land and water for agriculture. The indus- 
trial villages — or kafatim, in their Hebrew anagram — would be organized on a 
cooperative basis like a moshav shitufi. Their commonly owned resource, how- 
ever, would not be fields and orchards but a plant or plants in an industrial park 
central to a number of kafatim. These industries would be based on electronics, 
computers, optics and other operations which could be managed on a small scale. 
More than a dozen kafatim are already built or under construction. 

Since the Industrial Revolution, says Weitz, Western society has been "an 
ever-moving society" as technological changes alter traditional occupational 
structures and people are obliged to move in order to find work. It is also an ever 
urbanizing society with the cities becoming less and less livable. In the process, 
says Weitz, family and community have been replaced by an amorphous society. 
"The basis of society — the nuclear family — is being destroyed and the signs of 
nihilism are increasing. Look at Sweden. They have everything and don't know 
what to do. Religion is gone and the family structure is gone. A mortal stands 
naked and asks questions he should never have to ask — who am I, where am I 

The model of a new society represented by the kafat, Weitz believes, offers a 
way out of the blind alley of super-urbanization and rootlessness. The kafat per- 
mits a wide choice of occupational opportunities while maintaining geographical 
stability for the individual and family. It also offers a new style of life for per- 
sons weary of the city — a rural life based on mutual help and equality. Regional 
organization would permit a high level of amenities commensurate with the needs 
of the population that would seek out this type of living. 

"We are on the verge," says Weitz, "of giving the world something more far- 
reaching than the kibbutz or moshav." 



September 5, 1977. 

Request Made To Establish Local Council in Kiryat-Arba 
(By Haaretz correspondent in Jerusalem) 

Member of Knesset Mosheh Katzav (Likud) transferred into the hands of the 
ministers of Interior and Security, a request made by 150 residents of Kiryat 
Arba to establish tliere a local council and hold municipal elections. 

M. K. Katzav noted in his request that "Due to the special status granted to 
Kiryat Arba and to government policy, their request is quite justified." Kiryat 
Arba is presently governed by a directorate appointed by the ministries of 
Security and of Internal Affairs. 

September 15, 1977. 
Hundreds of Families Interested in Purchasing Apartments in Yamit 

(By Davar economic correspondent) 

Hundreds of families are interested in purchasing apartments in Yamit. 
75 candidates have already been listed for hou.sing. 

"Shikun Upituah" ^ company announced that registration of candidates for 
apartments in Yamit, that is in Population Program, stage 2, is closed. The 

^ A governmental company. 


apartments will be ready to receive the candidates by the end of next year. 
Requests of candidates to purchase or rent apartments will be individually con- 
sidered by the committee for settling Yamit. 

The candidates whose requests will be granted will receive loans, not linked 
to the Dollar rate, of up to 100,000 IP and the possibility of receiving another 
loan of up to 30,000 IP and a grant-in-aid of 25,000 IP. 

The prices of apartments up for sale in Yamit range as follows : In a one-floor 
building, the price of a three-room flat (75 sqm) is somewhere around 235,000 
IP and for a 4-room flat (86 sqm) — 270.0()0 IP ; the price of a three-room cottage 
(83 sqm) is 210,000 IP and for a 4-room cottage one may pay up to 230,000 IP. 

SEPTEMBEai 18, 1977. 
RrvLiN : Arabs Steal Land in the Galilee 

Mr. Moshe Rivlin, chairman of the Jewish National Fund directorate, sounded 
an alarm againsf'Theft of land by Arabs" in the Oalilee and called the author- 
ities to react by increasing Jewish involvement in the area. 

In an interview given to the Saturday radio newsprogram (Yoman Hashavua) 
Rivlin said that the alarm is not new and has been voiced by Jewish National 
Fund oflBcials before. "The land is burning right beneath our feet for there are 
increasing attempts by Arabs to take land away by force and create facts on the 
territory." The Jewish National Fund and other institutions should do well to 
find the means and the resources to counteract this by preparing land for grazing 
and for planting. If you plant — you establish ownership. And if you hesitate 
someone else will have planted before you." Mr. Rivlin sees this as being one 
of the most important tasks of the J.N.F. 

Mr. Rivlin also attaches great importance to the work of the J.N.F. in the 
South. As an example, he cited cas«s of land seizures by Arabs in the area 
around Yatir,^ an area to be shortly setled by Jews. Mr. Rivlin expressed the 
hope that another settlement will soon fill the portentous gap between Yatir and 
Beit-Kama. "We must, in practice, return those lands to the State of Israel," 
Mr. Rivlin emphasized. 

Mr. Rivlin avoided a lengthy discussion over the question of land purchasing 
in Judea and Samaria. "Ckjncerning the purchases — the less we talk, the more 
we shall be able to do," he declared and added that these land purchases can- 
not have any budgetary significance because one cannot know today what will 
be available tomorrow. In any case, "The J.N.F. and other institutions must be 
alert so as not to miss opportunities that flare up before us." 

The commentator revealed that the unclassified budget of the J.N.F. allocated 
2 million IP this year for the purchase of land beyond the green boundaries. 
It is well-known, however, that the actual sums spent exceed the explicit allo- 
cations by far. 

In any event, ample resources will always be found to finance opportunities 
that "flare-up" in the same way there will never be a closed budget for immi- 

Mr. Rivlin further stated in an answer to a question, that the J.N.F. will 
continue to oppose government plans to allow the purchase of land by private 
individuals in .«?eleeted urban areas in the occupied territories. There is no 
room for an ideological shift within the J.N.F. he said, the land belongs to 
the people, to the Jewish people. 

September 25, 1977. 

Gush-Emunim Is Renovating a House in Nablus Currently Used by the 

Security Forc?es 

(By Tufik Huri) 

Gush Eniunim are starting today to renovate "Beit Yaakov" in Nablus, in 
order to use it in the future as a field-school * and a base for settlements planned 
in the area. 

2 In the southern nart of the West- Bnnk. 

» The reason for the security of Mr. Rivlin that money will be always found, is that the 
USA will always plve. Specially so for settling the occupied territories, which they nomi- 
nally oppose I. Shahak. 

* A well-known first step to a settlement. I. Shahak. 


Ahron Pick, famous for organizing the march from the Hermon to the Suez 
Canal will oversee the renovation. Rebuilding will take three weeks and the 
field-school will be opened immediately afterwards. 

It should be noted, that past attempts at settling "Beit-Yaakov" notably by 
Rabbi Cahana and his men were resisted by the authorities. Gush Emunim will 
carry-out the renovation while the house is still occupied by the security forces. 

The Movement For A Different Zionism, centered in Jerusalem, sent a tele- 
gram yesterday to the Prime Minister, Menahem Begin, protesting the coop- 
eration between Gush Emunim and the security forces in the occupied terri- 
tories. Such cooperation finds an expression, they declared, in the renovation 
of the house while it is still occupied by the I.D.F. soldiers. 

The leaders of the Movement For A Different Zionism, state in their telegram 
that such acts form a stumbling block on the way to achieving peace and exhibit 
disregard of the existence of another people within the territorial boundaries 
of Israel. 

September 29, 1977. 
Field-Schools to be Opened in Yamit and in Katzrin 

The Society For the Preservation of Nature is soon to announce the opening 
of Field-Schools in Yamit, and, half a year later, in Katzrin. 

The number of Field-Schools will then reach 15 — from the Golan Heights 
to "Tzukei David" near the monastery of Santa-Katerina and "Xaama" near 
Oflra : The building of two new schools, one in Har-Tavor and one in Maale 
Ephraim will begin in the near future. 

The capacity of the field school in Har-Gilo (near Bethlehem) will be doubled 
this year and will reach 240. The field school in Har-Giloh will be the first to 
reach the second stage of building while the rest of the schools are still able to 
receive only 100-120 students. 

There are 300 workers in field schools today, one third of which are guides, 
one third temporary guides (female soldiers) and one third research workers, 
rangers and administrative worker.s. 

These details are revealed in the report presented to the directorate of the 
Society for the Preservation of Nature, that convened yesterday in Har-Giloh. 

The report further stated that trips organized by the Society will include, 
this year, 275,000 people— in comparison with 22,000 last year and 180,000 in 

There are 22,000 members in the Society of which a third are students and 
soldiers. There are, in addition, 250 collective bodies in the Society, the majority 
of which are kibbutzim. 

The number of subscribers to the Society publications is 41,000 : 24,000 sub- 
scribe to "Teva Vearetz"— a bi-monthly for adults; 7,000 to "Sal'it"— a monthly 
for adolescents and 10,000 to "Pashosh"— a monthly for children, presently in 
its fourth year. 

October 5, 1977. 

A Gush Emunim Detachment Is Consolidating a Settlement in the Military 
Camp of Shomron : A School Will Be Established and Industries Will 
Begin to Operate 

(By Davar correspondent in Netanya) 

Members of a "Gush-Emunim" detachment in the military camp Shomron in 
Sebastia celebrated Simchat-Torah yesterday. They were joined by their wives 
and children and by many Netanya residents, supporters of Gush-Emunim. 

It is possible, that already this week, the wives and children of the settlers 
will join the men in the tents given to them by the I.D.F. Later they will transfer 
into their own tents. 

The members will eat in a common mess-hall, which they hope to establish 
within ten days in a prefabricated building. They also hope to be provided with 
prefabs for residence before the winter. 

During the first stage the settlers will continue to work at their previous jobs. 
The Army is prepared to employ them as salaried civilians, especially as cooks 
and blacksmiths. When the wives and the 70 children arrive a kindergarten and 
a primary school will be established. The children will be taught by members 
of the detachment. 


Avraham Nevo, one of the activists in tliis group of settlers said that they are 
planning to establish a study-center for the Shomron which will give classes in 
archeology, history and geography for high school students.' The classes will be 
taught by university graduates and professional guides from the Society for the 
Preservation of Nature. The study-center will accommodate groups of students 
for intensive study seminars. They also plan to transfer industries owned by the 
members to the camp. These include textiles, factories, cartons and electronics 

October 6, 1977. 

A Government Commission Will Recommend, This Month, the Simplification 
OP Land-Purchasing Procedures in Judea and Samaria 

(By Nahum Barnea, Davar correspondent) 

An inter-ministerial commission, appointed by the Likud government will sub- 
mit, by the end of the month, its suggestions on the simplification of the proce- 
dures of land-trading in the occupied territories. This information was revealed 
by the director-general of the Ministry of Justice in an answer to a question 
posed by a "Davar" correspondent. 

These suggestions are intended to pave the way towards private speculation 
in land, pending only on the permission of the government. 

It should be recalled that one of the points elaborated in the Likud election 
platform was the abolition of the Labor government's resolution to forbid the 
purchase of land in the occupied territories. 

The commission, headed by the director-general of the Ministry of Justice, 
Meir Gabai includes representatives from the Ministry of Security and from 
the Land Authority. The commission was appointed about 6 weeks ago. The 
recommendations submitted by the commission mil simplify the purchase of land 
by the State. 

At present, land trading is carried out through the mediation of a company 
called "Heimanuta" * which is registered as a foreign company in the files of the 
firm-resistrar in RamaUah. The new regulations will be still subordinated to the 
Jordanian law but the procedures will be greatly simplified and the actual trading 
will take place under the auspices of the government, rather than through 
private companies. 

If the government makes the decision to keep to its promises of election-eve 
and permit private individuals to enjoy the new regulations, the political conse- 
quences of the commission's recommendations will have a far-reaching politiril 

The first to enjoy these regulations will be a company called "Yariv," at the 
head of which, stood, until a short while ago. the Minister of Commerce and 
Industrv, Y. Horovitz. Immediately after the Six-D<iy War. "Yariv" purchaser" 
hundreds of dunams near the village Jib near Nebi-Samuel, north of Jenisalem 
and paid 200,000 IP. The deal was carried-out in secret, through the mediation 
of the village Muchtar and is still not legally registered. If the government 
decides to "de-freeze" the regulations. "Yariv" will immediately attempt to 
register the land legally. It is estimated that the company will reap a profit of 
millions of poimds. 

Yigal Horovitz' son. Yoni Horovitz. who presently heads the company told 
"Davar" correspondent that he hopes that the Likud government will realize 
its pre-election promises. 

October 7, 1977. 

Ten Detachments of Settlers Organized Overseas — ^To the Galilee, Pithat- 
Rafiah (Rafah Approaches) and to the Arava 

(By Davar correspondent in Jerusalem) 

The joint settlement committee of the government and the Jewish Agency 
convened yesterday in Jerusalem to hear the report of its chairman. Minister 

■> In the IsmpH nnbllc schools. I. Shahak. 

" Which really belongs to the Jewish National Fund. I. Shahnk. 


Ariel Sharon concerning the admission of a Gush-Emunim detachment into the 
military base "Shomron". 

The committee decided to notify the bodies concerned to give the settlers all 
the help they may need with regard to housing, community services and work. 

The head of the public-relations department in the Jewish Agency, Avraham 
Shankar asked the chairman whether the ad-hoc settlement committee of min- 
isters was intended to get around the joint settlement committee. Minister Sharon 
explained the circumstances leading up to the creation of this ad-hoc committee 
and the background of its decision to admit detachments of Gush-Emunim settlers 
into military bases. When leaving the meeting, Sharon added that the committee 
was set-up in order to decide on certain sensitive issues that cannot be dealt with 
in the joint committee. 

The committee further decided to change the status of Yamit from an urban 
center to a city, and ordered the Ministry of Housing to draw up an urban con- 
tour-plan. It was further decided to draw-up settlement plans for the Arava, 
for Pithat Rafiah and for the Galilee, in order to accommodate 10 detachments of 
settlers organized overseas. 

The settlement committee of the Zionist Federation announced yesterday that 
so long as Gush Emunim settlers remain in military camps they will be under 
the care of the Ministry of Security and no civilian organization will be per- 
mitted to involve itself with them. The Settlement Committee is presently work- 
ing on a plan to provide "moral aid" to the permanent settlements of Gush 
Emunim in the West Bank (Ofra and Alon Moreh). 

It appears, that detachment "Dotan" of Gush Emunim will be the next one to 
be admitted into a military camp for settlement. Dotan will soon transfer to the 
Sanur police station. It is hoped that detachment Beit-El will follow suit and 
settle at the base in Beit-El. 

Gush-Emunim : We Have Managed To Operate in Coordination With the 


Gush-Emunim spokesman recalled, yesterday, the words of Minister Zevulun 
Hammer quoted in "Davar" that he prefers the establishment of large, semi- 
urban settlements based on industry than small settlements, spread out over a 
large territory, each comprising a small number of families. He added, however, 
that these small .settlements will serve as the beginning of large scale settlements. 
The spokesman further said that the government must be allowed to take all 
decisions concerning settlements and that Gush-Emunim has been making the 
effort and has been quite successful in coordinating its actions with the 

October 9, 1977. 

Extensive Construction Work Is Being Carried-Out in the "Temporary" 
Gush-Emunim Camp in ""Shomron" Military Base 

(By Amir Shapira, Al-Hamishmar correspondent) 

Construction work valued at tens of thousands of liras has been carried-out 
ever since the eve of Simhat-Torah in a military base in the Shomron where 
settlers of Gush-Emunim were to be temporarily sheltered. 

Military contractors and construction work-teams have been preparing the 
land around the military base so that the settlement will be able to sustain an 
independent living. 

I visited the base on the weekend and witnessed heavy machinery leveling 
the many dunams allotted to Gush-Emunim. Work on the temporary houses 
which will serve to shelter the settlers until a more permanent residence area 
be built, was begun today. The main gate to the base was also changed and a 
new entrance constructed, one that will open directly into the settlers' camp. 


Contracted work-teams are preparing the buildings which will house the 
services of the settlers. All preparatory work, including the equipment, is carried- 
out with the budget of the Ministry of Security. The estimated cost, not including 


the building equipment which is the property of the I.D.F. is tens of thousands 

of liras. 

The prefabricated houses which will serve as school classrooms, are to arrive 
today and will be placed in the center of the camp. 


It should be noted that none of the equipment to be seen is part of the equip- 
ment prepared by Gush-Emunim on the eve of the settlement. The equipment 
was given Gush-Emunim by the I.D.F. The workers with whom I spoke could 
not tell me of some basic plan according to which they were working and no one 
could say exactly how many houses they intend to build or what kind of services 
will be given to the settlers. 


According to one guess, the camp under construction is intended to support 
more than one settling detachment, in particular those who have not been al- 
lotted a definite settling zone. What this amounts to, is that the camp will serve 
as some sort of permanent training camp for the detachments of Gush-Emunim 
at least until their status will be changed from that of civilian workers for the 
military. . . . 

October 10, 1977. 

A New Settlement in the Area of Latrun 

Kfar Ruth, a new settlement belonging to the Moshav Movement came into 
existence on the weekend in the area of Latrun, near Beit-Horon, beyond the green 

The families will spend a while in temporary housing shelters before a perma- 
nent settlement is established. The settlers themselves, whether already inhabiting 
the area or not, are young couples from moshavs in the Judean mountains. 

Two more settlements are planned in that area. The first, Moshav Shilat will 
be built across from the military post Shilta, which gained fame during the battles 
over Latrun (in 1948). Detachment Shilat is due to arrive sometime this week. 
The settlement will belong to the Movement of Zionist Workers (Tnuat Haoved 
Hatzioni) of the Independent Liberal Party. 

The foundations of a second settlement are also being laid, while the settlers 
themselves, who belong to Agudat Israel, are being sheltered in Moshav Mevo 
Modi'yn, established several years ago in the area of Latrun. 

All three settlements were authorized by the previous government. 

It should be noted, that all four settlements, including Nevo Modi'yn are located 
on the eastern boundaries of the Ayalon Valley, which was considered no man's 
land until the Six Day War. The new road, presently under construction from the 
coastal plain to Jerusalem, will pass very near these settlements. 

October 11, 1977. 

The Bedouins in the Negev : We Shall Not Be Moved 

The Bedouins in the Negev, especially in the east and north are prepared to 
live in agricultural villages. They refuse, however, to settle the 6 villages offered 
to them, because the areas will soon liecome concentrations of cheap labor and 
within a generation will be transformed into centers of hostilities directed towards 
Israel — These statements were made by members of the Committee of Bedouin 
Rights in the Negev, at a press-conference in Tel-Aviv. 

The Secretary of the committee, Nuri El-Ukbi. claimed that after the establish- 
ment of the State of Israel, the Bedouins were evacuated from their lands for se- 
curity reasons. In their newly-acquired territory, they built huts to sustain their 
living and now these huts are being demolished. "We will not tolerate the policy 
of the Minister of Agriculture. Ariel Sharon, who ordered, even yesterday, the 
demolition of 7 houses." 

The Bedouins will not budge an inch from their lands, they will stand up to 
their rights and will refuse to settle in these work-camps, the spokesman added. 
He demanded that the government draw up plans for agricultural settlements 
for the Bedouins. 


October 11, 1977. 
Moshav Keshet is presently under construction in Tel-Ataly'ia, near Hushania 
in the Golan Heights. The mashov members, all from Gush-Emunim, settled 
first in Kuneitra from where they were transferred to Mashtela and then to 
Hushania military base. They were to be moved on to the inner part of the 
country, a plan they stubbornly refused. Their future settlement is presently 
being constructed and by completion of the first stage of construction will consist 
of 50 apartments. 

OCTOBEB 11, 1977. 

TzipoRi : We Explained to Gush-Emunim That We Shall React Strongly to 

Any "Mis-Conduct" 


Placing the settlers in military bases in Judea and Samaria is intended in order 
to keep a "low profile" as regards colonization. The decision is a consequence of 
various political constraints— said yesterday deputy Minister of Security, 
Mordechai Tzipori, in a conversation with reporters in Tel-Aviv. 

fThe Deputy-Minister, also said that it is quite possible that sometime in the 
future, the army will evacuate the bases and the place will be granted civilian 

the celebration was called off 

The Deputy to the Minister of Security revealed that "From the moment it 
became clear that the subject of settlements in Judea and Samaria will be under 
the authority of the Prime Minister we explained to Gush-Emunim two funda- 
mental ix)ints : 

If their aims are serious, then they share a common denominator with the 

We would like Israel to be country of law and justice that operates in accord- 
ance with the laws enacted by the Knesset. Under no condition are we prepared to 
allow for "misconduct," and we shall react strongly to any act questioning the 
authority of the government. 

The deputy-minister said that ever since these two points were explained there 
was no misconduct, excepting the settlement of Ofra. 

Tzipori further said that the men from detchment "Shomron" who were ad- 
mitted into the Shomron military base intended to hold a large celebration at the 
end of Simhat-Tora. 

"We forbade Gush-Emunim to hold the celebration and explained that only the 
settlers and their families would be allowed to commemorate the occasion." 


Tzipori elaborated the condition, under which Gush-Emunim would be per- 
mitted to enter the military bases in Judea and Samaria. The legal advisors to the 
government and to the Ministry of Security have drawn-up a document that is to 
be signed by every head of family wishing to settle one of the six military bases 
offered to Gush-Emunim. The document defines the legal status of the settlers as 
civilians in the service of the I.D.F. 

The Ministry of Security will assume no responsibility as to the security and 
welfare of the settlers. Any harm that will come by them will be negotiated by 
the .settlers themselves with the various insurance companies. 

The .settlers will be obliged to carry out all military commands and requests 
of the officer-in-charge of the camp where they live. 

Admission into the military bases will be conditioned on the settlers' signing the 

The .settlers will help the I.D.F. to solve its problems of man-power shortage. 
The I.D.F. will sign six-month contracts with every settler. Everyone signing 
the contracts will be granted the status of a civilian working for the military. He 
will receive a full salary. The financial resources with which winter shelters will 
be built, will come from the various settling bodies. In the near future, settlers will 
occupy six additional camps. 

Camp Yassef, near Ein-Fara ; 

Camp Sanur, on the Seba.stia-Jenin road (already next week) ; 

Nebi-Salah, near Ramallah ; 

Camp Giv'on, north of Jerusalem : 


Camp Beit-El ; and 

■Camp Horon, on the Datnin-Ramallah road. 

The government will ]>e assumed to authorize another settlement. 

The other detachments of Gush-Emunim for whom accommodation in military 
camps has not been found, will have to wait for the .solution of their problems, 
maybe through the authorization of their original settlement destinations. 

Tzipori also revealed that the ministerial committee concerning settlements, 
requested a budgetary increment of 100 million IP for the acceleration and 
facilitation of settlement plans designed for this year. 

OCTOBEB 12, 1977. 

Buildings to House Industry, to be Constructed in New Settlements in 
JuDEA, Samaria, Yamit and on the Golan 

(By Davar economic correspondent in Jerusalem) 

The interminist«rial committee for the development of new settlements decided 
yesterday to authorize the construction of buildings in an area of 10,000 sqm. 
to house industries in new settlements in Judea, Samaria, Yamit district and 
on the Golan Heights. Planning and foundation work will begin already during 
this fiscal year. 

The chairman of the committee. Deputy Minister of Industry, Yitzhak Peretz 
said, that the new settlements will receive all the financial aid the government 
grants to development towns. During the first years of these settlements' exist- 
ence, the financial aid will be of high priority, considering their particular val- 
uable locations and conditions in their area. 

Following talks held with secretaries of the settlements in the Shomron, it 
was decided, that the authorized bodies look into the plans of industrialists re- 
questing permission to establish industries in Kadum, Mesha (Pe'erim) and 
Ofra, even before the settlements themselves receive a permanent status. Simul- 
taneously, plans will be drawn-up for the exact construction of these buildings. 

The committee decided that the Ministry of Industry and the department of 
Village Construction in the Ministry of Housing and Construction will aid the 
settlers of Alon-Moreh in the reconstruction of the unfinished buildings which 
temporarily house their industry. 

The secretariat of the detachment was requested to prepare and present a 
detailed plan. 

A decision was also reached with the Ministry of Education to provide the 
necessary resources in order to improve and renovate the classrooms of the 
school in Kadum. Shlomo Avner, head of the department of A'illage Construc- 
tion announced that by the end of November construction of 7 classrooms will 
have been completed. 

The Ministry of Industry and the Department of Village Construction will also 
build a manufacturing center in Ofra. During the present time, however, only 
planning and ground-work will be undertaken, and a 1200 sqm. building for 
industry will be constructed. 

The inter-ministerial committee decided that within a month, registration will 
be opened to persons wishing to settle in the urban center of Maaleh-Ephraim. 
A committee to supervise the development of the area was appointed, chairman- 
ship was given to Eliahu Ati'eh, their advisor of industrialization. 

October 12, 1977. 
DoTAN Detachment Admitted Into Sanur Police-Station Near Jenin 

(By Amir Shapira, Al-Hamishmar correspondent) 

A pioneer detachment of settlers, was a^dmitted yesterday into the Sanur 
police-station, south of Jenin, and began preparations and construction work 
in order to facilitate the admission of their families at the beginning of next 

■' Now called Alon-Moreh. 


week. This is the second detachment of Gush-Emunim to enter into a military 
base, according to the agreement with the government. 

Gush-Emunim spokesman denied yesterday rumors about agitation among 
rank and file members of the Gush, following the announcement of Mordechai 
Tzipori, Deputy Minister of Security. Tzipori announced that settlers wishing 
to inhabit military bases will have to sign a document placing themselves under 
military authority. This document was prepared last week by the legal advisors 
to the government and to the Ministry of Security. The secretariat of Gush- 
Emunim knew of the document being prepared. The document stipulates two 
main points : the admission of settlers into military bases will be conditioned 
upon their placing themselves under military regulations including military law. 
(b) The I.D.F. is freed from any responsibility as to the welfare of the settlers. 

Yesterday, when the document became public, there were those who turned to 
the secretariat demanding an open discussion on the subject. 

The Gush-Emunim secretariat, meeting today, will probably discuss the issue 
and the Gush spokesman, who feels that this document "is not bad" told me that 
in his judgment it will be possible to convince the settlers to accept the document 
at least de-facto. 

The deputy Minister of Security, who announced the existence of the document 
to journalists, emphasized that anyone refusing to sign it will be removed from 
the base. It appears, that the secretariat of Gush Emunim will pass a resolution 
binding the w^hole movement to the document and will not permit individuals to 
sign or refuse to sign it. 

October 16, 1977. 

Undeb Cover of Darkness, the Jericho Detachment Moved to a Location 5 Km. 

North of Maaleh-Edumim 

(By Yosef Waxman) 

Another detachment of Gush-Emunim, about which nothing was knowni before, 
settled in Nahal-Tekoa in the Jordan Valley. The coordinator of settlements 
appointed by Minister Arik Sharon, told Maariv correspondent that one Gush- 
Ehnunim detachment did, in fact join the settlement of Tekoa, which is inhabited 
by the Nahal. The coordinator, Deputy Colonel (reserves) Uri Bar-On, noted that 
the settlement of Tekoa was established in the days of the former government. 

Maariv correspondent learned that this detachment consists of 20 young men 
and women, immigrants from the Soviet-Union.' Tliis detachment is not included 
among the 11 settling squads for which Gush-Emunim asked government authori- 
zation, and among the 6 detachments w^ho are to settle in military bases. 

THE settlers IN SANXJR 

Shimon Ravid, the general-director of the settlement department in the Jewish 
Agency and the Zionist Federation, told Maariv correspondent that his depart- 
ment is handling this group of settlers in the same manner that it handles Nahal 
servicemen. He added that the future status of the settlement is still uncertain. 
The department is presently studying the area in order to determine its future. 

Another detachment of Gush-Emunim — "Dotan" is moving into the Sanur police 
station today. 

A pioneer group of settlers, moved in last w^eek and is to be joined by the rest of 
the detachment today. 

The settlers will not live in the actual police building. Mr. Uri Bar-On says that 
until a permanent solution is found, the settlers will live in tents and in caravans. 

Mr. Bar-On further stated that 5 caravans will arrive today in Ofra. These cara- 
vans will house the settlers of Ein-Shiloh. More will arrive at the end of the week. 


Last Thursday, the settlers of detachment Jericho moved to an area called 
Tabak-Reish, which is to be the permanent location of Maale-Bdumim. Tabak- 
Reish is located about 5 Km. north of the Edumim plateau, directly above Jericho 
and the Jordan Valley. 

The decision to move the detachment to was taken suddenly last 
Thursday night and was immediately carried-out. Negotiations were held for 

8 Who are, because of this, helped specially, by the U.S. funds allocated to housing immi- 
grants from the U.S.S.R. I. Shahak. 


about two weeks previously and it is unknown why Gush-Emunim decided to 
implement its plans under cover of darkness. Last Friday tents and caravans were 
set up and were soon occupied by 20 families and another 20 single men and 
 Mr. Uri Bar-On says that the members of Detachment Jericho will develop 
Kalia beach in the Dead Sea. 

The members of the detachment said that they consider their present location 
as temporary. They are interested in settling in the town of Jericho proper. 

October 18, 1977. 

Following an Order by Tzipori : Detachment Shomron — Into Military 


(By Haaretz correspondent in Jerusalem) 

Due to the heavy rains, Deputy Minister of Security, Mordechai Tzipori 
ordered the members of detachment Shomron, who are presently living in tents 
in Kadum, to enter military barracks. 

It was announced that the members of the detachments asked the Ministry of 
Security to permit them to move into Sebastia, their future permanent location. 

October 20, 1977. 
Gush-Emunim Secretariat Is Debating the Future of the Settlements 

(By Davar correspondent in Jerusalem) 

A debate was held yesterday in the secretariat of Gush-Emunim whether 
the movement should continue to settle more areas or concern itself with con- 
solidating the existing ones. No decision was taken. 

80 families and about 40 single persons, members of Gush Emunim settlement 
detachments are presently living in three military bases in the West-Bank. The 
settlers of "Karnei Shomron"' moved into buildings inside the military base, 
Kadum, following the heavy rains that hit the area. 

Sanur, near Jenin, is inhabited by detachment Dotan, detachment Shomron is 
in Camp Shomron. In Ofra, near Ramallah, detachment "Shiloh" is awaiting per- 
mission to settle independently. 

A unit of soldiers is engaged in rebuilding the police station in Nebi-Salah, 
preparing it for the settlers who are soon to arrive. Detachment "Beit-El" was 
dispersed until their date of settlement is agreed upon. 

October 20, 1977. 

All 12 Detachments Mentioned in the "Temporary Plan" Will Settle in 
the Next Few Months — Say S ' kces in Gush-Emunim 

(By Yehuda Litani, Haaretz correspondent) 

Sources in Gush-Emunim revealed that within the next few months all 12 
detachments mentioned in the "temporary plan" will settle in Judea and Samaria. 
The settlers will be housed in military bases (which. Gush Emunim hopes the 
I.D.F. will evacuate after a while) or in Nahal settlements, that will be handed 
over to Gush-Emunim over a period of time. 

Up till now, only one settlement has been established. In accordance with the 
plan — Yatir — in the southern section of Mt. Hebron. Detachment Jericho moved 
last week to a location near Maaleh-Edumim (which will be their permanent 
settlement). Detachment Karnei-Shomron is in Camp Kadum, Dotan in Sanur 
police station, Shomron in Camp Shomron and several more detachments will 
enter military bases in the next few weeks. It was announced that there are 80 
families and 40 singles in military bases and in recognized settlements. 



The members of detachment Karnei Shomron moved, yesterday, into military 
barracks in Kadum after a consistent refusal to do so in spite of the rains. They 
pre.-iously demanded to be allowed to move into their permanent location — in 
Sebastia. Minister of Agriculture, Ariel Sharon, paid a visit to Kadum on Tues- 
day to see the condition under which the settlers are being maintained. 


A debate took place yesterday in the secretariat of Gush Emunim. The issue 
debated was the plans of the movement for the next few months. There are sev- 
eral members who side with placing all available resources at the disposal of the 
existing 12 settlements while there are others who feel that the aim of the move- 
ment should be the immediate settlement of all available territory. No decision 
was reached. 

October 21, 1977. 
Thirteen Industries Are in Operation in the Plateau of Edumim 

(By Israel Tomer) 

Two years ago the plateau of Edumim began developing. Today, there are 
already 13 industries in operation. Several more are to be established shortly. 
This information was given by Shlomo Blakind, the director-general of the 
Jerusalem Economic Company, a firm actively involved in developing the area 
and maintaining the new industries. 

Among the newly-founded industries are metal works, a factory for electronic 
computer systems, electricity works and a factory producing hydraulic lifts. 

A dairy for cheeses and milk products will be opened in a short while. 

"The transfer of industries" — said the director-general — "Can be carried out 
quite rapidly due to the fact that the Economic Company is preparing a large 
reserve of buildings that can house the industries." 

The factories established in the area enjoy, among other things, the status of 
"a Development area Type A", which grants them services provided by the 
municipality of Jerusalem. The Edumim plateau is located about 10 Km. beyond 
the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem and about 15 Km. from the center of 

Construction of School in Hamba, Jordan Valley, Is Complete 

(By Yoel Dar, Davar correspondent) 

The construction of a primary school has reached completion in Moshav Hamra 
in the Jordan Valley. This is the first Hebrew school in the valley. There are 
seven classrooms in the building. The head of the Ministry of Education and 
Culture in the northern district, Yosef Levi, said that a junior-high school should 
be built in the valley. 

20-488 O - 78 - 10 



how the State Department and 
the U.S . Embassy in Tel Aviv 
have misled President Carter 
about Israel's violation of 
Palestinian human rights. 

Issued by 

the Internationa-^ ^.ommittee *^or Palestinian Human Rights 
16 rue Augereau 75007 Paris 



At the beginning of this year the State Department, in preparation for 
President Carter's initiative in giving human rights pror.iinence in An^erican 
foreign policy, produced a survey examining how human rights v are being 
observed in a number of coi'ntries. 

The section dealing with Isra-I is a dishonest document, full of untruths 
and h^lf-truths and patently designed to assure the President that, in difficult 
circumstances, Israel was making ^, commendable, even if not wholly 
successful, effort to provide for a-'* -observe the human rights of Palestinian 
Arabs living under Israeli rule, both in Israel proper and in the occupied 
territories. Presumably the responsibility for this essay in nnisirforming 
their President rests with officials in the American Fmbassy in Tel Aviv and 
in the State Department in Washington. 

The survey starts by pointing out the need to distingjish between the Arab 
minority in Israel and the Arab inhabitants of th'^ o,~r~. .r,,-,,^ <-. — ritories. It then 
provides a note on the ''P-iHtical Situation" by way of introduction to the survey 
of human rights issue-^. It deals with "Israel Proper" un'^er the headings 
"Legal Situation" and "Observance of interna tiorally recognised Human Rights", 
the latter being subdivided into "Integrity of the Person" and "Other Important 
Freedoms". The same pattern is then repeated with "Israel's Occupied 
Territories". The survey concludes with a section entitled "Other Human Rights 
Reporting" . 

The foV'^wing commentary '^uo'-es passao'^s fronn the survey with p>arallel 
notes on each fsassage. It ends with sonne general remarks. 

contd /2 


-2 - 



"Despite the protection of 
the rights of the Arab 
minority under Israel's laws, 
and governmental and private 
efforts nr>ade buring the 29 
years of the state to 
encourage Israel's Arabs 
to think of themselves as 
part of the society, the 
Arab minority has felt 
more or less alien to 
Israel and has not con- 
sidered itself to have full 

The implication is clear: Israel has done its best to 
accommodate the Arab minority but they have not 
responded and subjectively persist in regarding 
themselves as alien and unequal . As a corrective to 
this sweeping exoneration of Israel in its treatment of 
its Arab minority, here is what Mrs. Shulamit Aloni , 
a highly respected Member of the Knesset and leader 
of the Civil Rights Movement in Israel, had to say in 
Yediot Aharonot of 10 October 1975: 

"In the twenty eight years since the creation 
of the State of Israel we have not yet learned 
that one should behave towards Arabs as 
citizens with equal rights and duties and 
treat their problenns like those of all other 
citizens, directly and without discrimination." 

Other Israeli Jews have criticised in similarly 
outspoken terms the discrimination practised in Israel 
against the Arab nninority. In January 1977 Doron 
Rosenblum of Haaretz interviewed Shmuel Toledano, 
who was about to retire after serving for 10 years as 
Adviser on Arab Affairs to SLiccessive Israeli Prime 
Ministers . After exploring sonne of the areas in which 
there was discrimination against Arabs in Israel, 
Rosenblum posed a blunt question: "Can we say, 
unambiguously, that Israeli Arabs are second-class 
citizens?" Toledano replied: 

"Very unfortunately, we can. The only wise 
course now is to create an atmosphere of 
familiarity. If the present situation continues 
and nothing is done, some unpleasant things 
await us. Very soon there will be hundreds 
of educated Arabs without work. An 

contd /3 


unemployed group Uko that is dynamite and 

this isn't understood among us." 
Such Israeli Jewish testimony is ignored or 
brushed aside in the State Department's survey. 

Far from encouraging Israel's Arabs to think of 
themselves as part of Israeli society j the trend 
of public policy in Israel s€c; ^s to be towards 
keeping Jews and Arabs apart, raiher thnn inducing 
them to mix. For examp'.ej on 13 January 1977 
Yediot Aharonot reported that an Arab ejected from 
his house in the expanded Jewish quarter of the 
Old City applied for a flat in that quarter, but was 
turned down. The report continued: 

"Yesterday all the family's belongings were 
removed from the house and transferred to the 
storage rooms of the 'Society for the 
Rehabilitation and Development of the Jewish 
Quarter' . The family refused to help with 
the removal, but did not offer violent 
resistance . " 
The Arab house was demolished. 

"Although SC Resolution 
242 of November, 1967 calls 
for Israeli withdrawal from 
occupied territories only in 
the context of an overall 
peace settlement that would 
also recognize Israel's right 
to exist, the continuing 
occupation of these Arab- 
populated areas has 
exacerbated criticism of 
Israel in the United 
Nations and other inter- 

This suggests that the grounds for criticism are 
simply that Israel has remained in occupation of Arab 
land pending a peace settlement. That is a 
misleading over-simplification. The main grounds 
for criticism are not so much that Israel has 
maintained its occupation pending a peace settlement 
but that it has abused its position as the occupying 
power in order to change the status of East Jerusalem 
and to settle Israeli citizens in the occupied 
territories with a view to incorporating them 
pernnanently in the Str.te of Israel. In 
pursuing this usurpation of Arab lands, Israel has 
ille^Uy dispossessed Arab landowners and subjected 

contd /4 


- 4 - 

national forums , " 

the Arab population generally to harsh and 
oppressive treatment. 

According to Ha'aretz of 2 March 1977, 
"Between 1976 and 1977 the Israeli Land 
Authority purchased over 3,500 dunam of 
land for 8 nnillion Israeli pounds . It also 
acquired the rights over another 32,000 
dunam and is now negotiating the purchase 
of and rights over 60,000 dunam. The land 
is largely intended for settlement by 
Israelis and is situated in the Jordan valley. " 

In other words, it was Arab land, and much of It 

has been expropriated. 



"Israeli law and practice 
provide for all the rights 
and liberties traditional in 
Western democracies. Its 
internal practices accord 
generally with standards 
observed in Western 
democracies . " 

As a general statement this is simply untrue . To be 
sure, the bulk of the legislation in Israel does not 
distinguish overtly and in so many words between 
Israeli Jewish and Israeli Arab citizens . But in its 
practical application discrimination against the Arab 
citizen is rife and entrenched. It is most marked in 
the ownership and use of land. A series of 
confiscatory land laws has been enacted which are 
invoked against Arab landowners in order to deprive 
them of their land for the benefit of Israeli Jews. 
These laws are rarely, if ever, invoked against 
Jewish citizens. Other laws deny Arabs any share in 
Jewish-owned land and even prohibit them from 
working or living on such land. By its charter the 
Jewish National Fund, which has been designated as 
the agent of the Government of Israel for the 
acquisition and development of land, is required to 
enforce discrimination against Arabs who are thus 

contd /5 


- 5 - 

precluded from owning, leasing, cultivating or living 
on land acquired by the Fund. 

Moreover, in one all-important respect there is 
specific and overt discrimination in the legislation 
itself. This is in regard to the basic rights of entry 
into the country, residence there and acquisition of 
citizenship. The notorious Law of Return admits into 
Israel any Jewish immigrant^ wherever he may have 
been born, and automatically confers on him Israeli 
nationality. The same rights are not extended to 
non-Jews and particularly not to Palestinian Arabs, 
even though they were born and had their homes in 
the territory which became Israel . Even those 
Palestinian Arabs who remained within Israel were 
not granted citizenship as of right but had to apply 
for naturalisation for which they had to satisfy 
certain stringent requirements. The Law of 
Nationality has deprived many thousands of Arabs 
still living in Israel of the right of citizenship and 
has rendered their children 'stateless'. 

These are f^cts. They are abundantly documented 
and recorded both in Israel and outside. Presumably 
they must be known to the staff of the U.S. Embassy 
in Tel Aviv. How then can the State Department in 
the document here under discussion nnake the 
assertions quoted above about Israeli law and practice 
providing "for all the rights and liberties traditional 
in Western democracies" and about the internal 
practices in Israel according "generally with standards 
observed in Western democracies"? In what 
Western democracy are citizens prevented from 
residing where they will because of their religion and 
ethnic origin? Where are they precluded on those 

contd /6 


- 6 - 

grounds from owning or v/orkin.j on land which is open 
to their fellow citizens? Where in any Western 
democracy is land systematically confiscated from 
one ethnic group in order that it should be made 
available to another? 


A . Integrity of the Person 

"Human rights relating to life, This again Is untru-^ . Although f-.e nnilitary 

liberty, and the security of government which was imposed on the Arab minority 

person are observed in Israel in Israel's earlier years was abolished in 1966, the 

proper, without distinction Defence (Emergency) Regulations have continued in 

between Jews and Israeli- force (the powers being transferred from the military 

citizen Arabs. Propagandistic to the police) r.r.d h::vo. been irivoksd agMnst Israeli 

charges of nnistreatnnent of Arabs but scarcely ever analnst Israeli Jews. Under 

Israeli Arabs in this sphere those Regulations many Israeli Arsbs have been 

fire without foundation. " detained or plncec' under house arr:~t or had their 

movements re::tricted. 

"The treatment of Israeli 
citizens by the authorities 
is humane, and prison 
conditions in Israel are 
satisfactory. Some Arab 
citizens of Israel resorted to 
violent demonstrations in 
early 1976 for the first time 
in the country's history, and 
force was applied to quell 
the disturtiances . " 

The implication is tl-.nt the Israeli authorities were 
blameless and that Arabs rerscrted to violence 
v/ithout cause or provocation. 

In fact the dinturbances of 1976 were not the first 
in Israel's history. Ar. long ago as 30 September' 1971 
a riot broke out ;n the Ashkelon p.^ison. It was 
extensively reported in the Hebrew Press. 
Haolam Hazeh of 27 October 1971 reported at 
length on the conditions in the prison and on the ill- 
treatment of the prisoners there. It summed up its 
findings in these words - 

"Ashkelcn is hell . A place where prisoners - 
mainly Arabs - are sent to break their spirits . 
Not for interrogation, God forbid, but only after 
trial . Ashkelon is a special-punishment jail . 

contd /7 


- 7 - 

Prisoners transferred healthy and upright from 
Ramleh, go back to Ramleh after a few weeks 
broken, destroyed - and silent." 

As for the dennonstrations against prison conditions 
which occurred in 1976 (and again in the early part 
of 1977), the truth is that the Israeli authorities 
themselves have admitted that prison conditions in 
Israel are not satisfactory and this has been reported 
in the international press. For example, Eric 
Marsden's report in The Times (London) of 10 
February 1977 described in some detail the ovei — 
crowding and bad conditions in Israeli prisons and 
quoted the Israeli Commissioner of Prisons, 
Mr. Haim Levi, as saying that: 

"Prisoners in Israel have an average living 
space of 2.2 square metres, connpared 
with 11.3 square metres in tine United States. " 

There is a large body of p>^ima facie evidence that 
Israeli Arab prisoners have often been physically 
assaulted and systematically ill-treated in Israeli 
prisons. For exannple, the Palestinian poet, 
Fouzi el-Asmar, gives a detailed account of the 
ill-treatment he received in several different Israeli 
prisons in his autobiographical book "To be an Arab 
in Israel". Other and more recent cases have been 
described in material published by the Israel League 
of Human and Civil Rights and from time to time in 
the Hebrew press. For example, Yediot Aharonot 
of 18 April 1975 carried a long and detailed article 
in which the reporter, an Israeli Jew, described 
seeing the police beat up an Arab in the yard of the 
court-house at Beersheba . The Arab was then 
charged with assault. The report continues with a 

contd /8 


- 8 - 

verbatim account of the proceedings in court showing 
that it was a ludicrous travesty of justice. 

An example of the use of excessive force by the 
Israeli authorities was provided on the occasion of 
the "Day of the Land" on 30 /V.arch 1976. This was 
a one-day strike by Arabs in Galilee to protest 
against the confiscation of thousands of dunams of 
their land as part of a plan known as the 
Judaization of Galilee. In the course of a single 
day seven Arabs were shot dead and scores were 
wounded and beaten up. The security forces shot 
indiscriminately into crowds, bludgeoned anyone 
in sight and dragged people out of their homes to 
arrest them. Writing in Haolam Hazeh of 7 April 
1976 Elie Tabor commented: 

"When an independent militarily strong state 
speaks the language of force to a national 
minority that ILves in itj as happened in 
Galilee last week, it is not a display of strength 
but obviously derives from weakness and shows 
that the Israeli government is afraid of the 
Arabs of Israel whom it does not treat as 
citizens with equal rights. It employs 
repressive measures against them as if they 
were a people under occupation, exactly as 
it did some weeks ago in repressing the 
protest demonstrations in the West Bank." 
He went on to describe the years since the 
establishment of the State of Israel as 

"28 years of plundering, theft of abandoned 
property, confiscation and national persecution, 
economic and social backwardness, and 
encouragennent of feudalisnn." 

contd /9 


This year (1977) on the anniversary of the "Day 
of the Land" dennonstrations again occurred in 
Galilee . Al-Hamishmar of 4 April and Ha'aretz 
of 5 April carried detailed reports of brutal attacks 
by the police and border c^iards against the villages 
of Jatt and Baka al-Gharbyieh. Twenty people were 

B. Other Important Freedonns 
"Israel's Arab minority has 
equal rights with Jews under 
the law and In recent years 
has been able to exercise its 
civil rights fully, with only 
rare instances of civil rights 
discrinnination. Subtler 
forms of discrimination on 
an individual basis, in such 
spheres as holding political 
office and employment 
opportunities, do occur." 

The escape clause at the end of this passage tends to 
nullilV the preceding generalisation. How rare 
are the "Instances of civil rights discrimination"? 
How prevalent are the "subtler forms of 
discrimination on an individual t)asis"? 
Ha'aretz of 26 March 1975 carried an open letter by 
Professor Uzi Osnnan describing the system of 
privileges and discrimination which is now built 
into Israeli society. He summed up: 

"Today, equality between citizens is only to 
be found in the Israeli Declaration of 
Independence - a nice docunnent, which 
expresses the ideals of an earlier period, 
but is devoid of any judicial or legal value 
in Israel: In the actual life of the 
country, all sorts of privileges were 
ensured and consolidated by laws and 
regulations still in force" . 
A striking example of discrimination against the 
Arabs of Israel is provided by the new town of Carmiel 
(a suburb of Haifa) which is exclusively reserved 
for Jews. A long article in Ha'aretz of 18 February 
1972 described the markedly racialist attitudes of 
the Jewish residents there. Again Upper Nazareth is 
reserved for Israeli Jews and many flats stand empty 

contd /10 


- 10 - 

there, while in Lower (Arab) Nazareth there is much 
overcrowdi ng . 

"There is general freedom of 
expression, opinion, and 
assembly. The Government 
reserves the right to control 
public assemblies and 
parades . Both the Hebrew 
and Arabic press are free 
and express a wide variety 
of opinions . All newspapers 
in Israel are subject to 
censorship on military 
matters. Political freedom 
is guaranteed for all shades 
of political views . " 

The Emergency Regulations empower the authorities 
in Israel to impose censorship on newspapers and to 
prohibit them from piiblishing specified matters which 
may impair "the security of the state and the public 
interest" (Art. 87); and also to suspend newspapers or 
to close them down (Art. 94-98). "Security" is 
interpreted in an extremely broad way and is not 
limited to military security. The authorities have 
absolute discretion to reft'se licences for the 
publication of newspapers and have used these pov^ers. 
They are not required to disclose their reasons. 

Two occasions on which the'5e powers were used were: 
(1) in 1960 to prevent the publication in Arabic of a 
paper called al-A rd by an Arab nationalist group which 
advocated recognition of ths rights of the Palestinian 
Arab people and cf the Arabs in IsrC-'^'j and (2) in 1969 
to prevent the publication in Arabic of a paper called 
al-Nur by Matzpen (tine Isrocli Socialist Organisation). 
In the former case the matter was taken to the 
Supreme Court which decided that it could not 
interfere with the discretionary power conferred by 
the Ennergency Regulations . 

On 12th April 1977 the Mayors of -"2 West Bank towns 
sent a lette- of protert to the United Nations, 
complaining of Israeli censorship of Arabic papers in 
East Jerusalem. According to a report on that date in 
Davar they sent it to the Hur.ian Rights Commission 
complaining that journalists were prevented by the 
nnilitary government from doing their job in the 
occupied territories when it came to reporting land 

contd . 



- 11 - 

expropriations, colonization projects and 
denrionstrations . 

When the censor insists on the excision of some 
report, the Arab editor is not allowed to leave 
the space blank, but must fill it, however short the 
notice, with other news. These conditions apply 
only to the Arabic press . 

Freedom of association is in theory almost absolute. 
But in practice there is constant discrimination between 
Arabs and Jews in this respect. It is exercised by 
invoking the Emergency powers relating to freedom 
of the person against Arab individuals who seek to 
establish any political organisation specifically for 
Arabs. These powers have been used even to 
prevent the establishment of Arab sports and cultural 
clubs. When Israeli Arabs attempted in 1964 to 
establish a political party with candidates for election 
to the Knesset > the leaders of the movement were 
expelled from their homes and required to live in 
wholly Jewish towns until the elections were over. 

Sabri Jiryis, speaking with first-hand knowledge of 
how "political freedom is guaranteed for all shades of 
political opinion" in Israel, sums up the nnatter in 
these words - 

"Within the framework of Zionist thought, the 
Israeli citizen can enjoy democratic freedonns. 
But it is a different matter when there is an 
attennpt to oppose the Zionist entity or to change 
it, even by democratic methods, or when there 
is a demand for national political rights. This is 
especially the case when such activity assumes an 
Arab or, as the Israeli authorities prefer to 

contd /1 2 


- 12 - 

call tt, a "security" character. Then all these 

freedoms go by the board . " 
(Sabri JiryiSj Democratic Freedoms in Israel, p. 9, 
published by The Institute for Palestine Studies). 


"The civil liberties 
situation in the occupied 
territories is different 
from that in Israel proper 
because of the inevitable 
tension between the 
occupying authorities and 
the indigenous population 
and the constant security 
threat posed by occasional 
demonstrations and 
clandestine dissident groups. 

The intention of this comment seems to be to 
establish a presumption in the reader's mind that 
the special circumstances of the occupied territories 
justify specially harsh and repressive measures, and 
that the feult lies not with those who occupy land 
which does not belong to them but with those who 
resist that occupation. 

"The occupied territories are 
under military governnnent, 
and their administration is 
considered by the United 
Nat ions and by the United 
States to be governed by the 
stipulations of the Fourth 
Geneva Convention regarding 
occupied territories, an 
interpretation Israel has 
contested . " 

Having explained that the administration of the 
occupied territories is considered by the United 
Nations (" and by the United States") to be governed 
by the Fourth Geneva Convention, the survey observes 
that this is "an interpretation Israel has contested" - 
but does not mention that there are no grounds for 
Israel's interpretation, nor that the United States 
joined with other members of the Security Council in 
the consensus statement of 1 1 November 1976 which 
deplored the establishment of Israeli settlennents in 
the occupied territories and declared that such 
measures, including the annexation of East Jerusalem, 
had no legal validity. 

contd /13 


- 13 - 

"Nevertheless, as required 
by the Convention, Jordanian 
law (with Sonne Israeli 
modifications, such as 
election laws and a value- 
added tax) is applied on 
the Wost Bank - but not in 
East Jerusalem . " 

This comment is disingenous. Israel has applied its 
own Emergency Regulations to the occupied territories 
and these override the Jordanian law in matters 
affecting human rights. Then too, the throw-away 
reference to East Jerusalem tends to play down the 
crucial impo.^tance of that area and the total 
illegality' of Israel's annexation. It also obscures the 
f „ct that tlie area ;-urportediy annexed by Israel 
comprises not only the Cld City (within the walls) b'Jt 
also a large extent of adjacent territory stretching 
from Kalandia in the north to the outskirts of 
Bethlehem in the south. 

"As for administrative 
Jc*-ontion, under British- 
Mandate ennergency laws 
that Jordan was still 
enforcing on the West Bank 
when Israel occupied it in 
12-37, tlie authorities can 
liave persons detained on 
security grounds up to 

six nnonths without filing 


charges against them or 

bringing thenn to trial 
and, since such detention is 
renewable, can hold such 
individuals more or less 
indefinitely. " 

The survey goes out of its way to point out that, 
before Ic-ael occupied the West Bank, Jordan was 
enforcing the sanne power of administrative detention 
that Israel now exercises (both Jordan and Israel 
having inherited the power fronn the Mandate 
Governnnent) . But it does not explain that it is one 
thing for a sovereign government to exercise such a 
power over its own citizens and another for an 
occupying government to do so (in contravention of the 
Fourth Geneva Convention) over the civilian population 
living unders its occupation. 


A. Integrity of the Person 

"In the occupied areas, 'J.\2 

occupation authorities have 

The survey doec not nncntior. th? ^c^'e on which Unc 
Israelis have resorted to this vicious punitive action 

contd /14 


razed houses suspected or 
known to have harboured 
terrorists . " 

- 14 - 

nor the wanton way in which it has been inrifxised. 
Over 16,000 houses have been destroyed, many of 
them without any real evidence of their having been 
used to harbour terrorists . In addition a number of 
entire villages have been destroyed. In the case of 
Nebi Samwil the Israeli authorities did not even invoke 
the pretext of terrorist activity. 

"In quelling demonstrations 
and restoring order in the 
territories, the Israeli 
authorities in saveral 
instances have used 
excessive force . These 
actions have not reflected 
government policy, and 
individuals found guilty of 
such excesses have been 
disciplined and occasionally 
jailed. The use of extrenne 
pressures during 
interrogatiqns of security 
suspects has been described 
in certain reports and may 
have taken place, although 
reports of the use of actual 
torture during 
interrogations have not been 

Many of the actions of the Israeli forces in the 
occupied territories have tended more to provoke 
disorder than to "restore order", and no one can say 
with certainty that the excesses they have committed 
"have not reflected governnrient policy" . There is no 
lack of precedents in Israel's history for the delitserate 
and planned provocation of violent Arab reactions in 
order to provide a pretext for the use of force. 

Here are two examples of the provocative use of 
excessive violence by Israel's security forces: 

(1) On 5 October 1976 al-Hamishmar reported: "On 
Saturday morning while Moslems were praying 
at the Tomb (sc. of Abraham at Hebron) fifteen 
inhabitants of Kiryat Art>a (sc. the Israeli 
settlement near Hebron) arrived on the scene, 
incensed by those praying, started a fight, 
damaged property and destroyed several volunnes 
of the Koran." 

The next day Ha'aretz reported: 

"After the desecration of the mosque soldiers 
attacked those youths who were still inside 
Abraham's tomb and beat them up using rifle 
butts, truncheons and bare fists." 

(2) On 26 June 1977 the Sunday Times published a 
letter from Miss Elizabeth Monroe C.M.G, 
giving her own eye-witness account of an 

contd . 



- 15 - 

incident at Ramallah where "brutality was 
used as a deterrent" against protest 
demonstrations. On 9 March 1977 students at 
the UNRWA teachers training college held a 
sit-in strike in support of hunger-striking 
prisoners in Ashkelon gaol, Sonne students set 
up a road block and threw stones at Israeli 
soldiers. These students ran off and escaped. 
The soldiers then entered and teargassed the 
college. About 70 students ran up a hill to escape 
the gas; a random 17 of them were rounded up, 
and "made to serve as an example". UNRWA 
officials nnanaged to have these 17 students 
rennoved to the Augusta Victoria Hospital in 
East Jerusalem. Miss Monroe continues: 
"I visited them there on March lOth, and 
saw that (1) the backs of all of them were 
heavily blood-bruised in a chevron pattern 
that suggested beating from both sides; 

(2) two had been kicked in the genitals 
and were passing blood in their water; 

(3) several had beaten arms, near or on 
the elbow; (4) two had badly cut heads, 
entailing shaved hair and many stitches; 
(5) three had bruised mouths, and two of 
them missing teeth. UNRWA officials 
arrived to take deposit'ons just as I was 
leaving, so they have the medical 

Israelis said that these wounds happened 
because students fell down the hill; this 
explanation is incompatible with the 
injuries that I saw." 

contd /1 6 

20-488 O - 78 - 11 


- 16 - 

A detailed inquiry published in the Sunday Times cf 
19 June 1977 came to the conclusion that the use of 
torture was "sanctioned at some level as deliberate 
policy" . It said: 

"Torture is organised so rne thodically that it c?nno': 
be dismissed as a handftjl of 'rogue cops' 
exceeding orders. It is systerrialic . It appears 
to be sanctioned at oume level as deUbf.rate 
policy" . 

"As regards prison conditions 
in the territories, a recent 
International Red Cross 
inspection found that 
prisoners under Israeli 
control are living under 
satisfactory conditions". 

The survey does not menticn that, as explained in the 
Sunday Tinnes inquiry' and in many previous reports 
by such bodies as the Israeli League for Human and 
Civil Rights, the Icraeli c'o not allow the 
International Red Cross to inspect Interrogation 
centres, police stations ard military cannps where 
prisoners are kept. The S undiiy Tinnes added: 
"Nor do they have unrestricted access even to 
prisons. Attached to prisons in the occupied 
territories are sots of ce'.lj wl^iich the Red Cross 
cannot sec" . 
Many of the complaints about prison conditions rcl^ti- 
to these other place" of detention which are separate 
from the regular prisons. 

Moreover, since ti">e disturbcncos which occurred in 
1976 and again earlier tf-iis year in protest against 
the conditions in Israeli prisons, nnuch evidence has 
accumulated to show that those conditions are often 
bad and that the connplaints were fully justified. On 
13 January 1977 the International Red Cross took the 
highly unusual step of issuing a public statement 
drawing attention to the Israeli Government's failure 
to end overcrowding and to improve conditions in 

contd . 




- 17 - 

respect of medical services, family contacts and 
cultural facilities. 

"Over the years the Israeli 
authorities have frequently 
expelled residents of the 
territories suspected or 
known to have engaged in 
terrorisnn or anti-Israeli 
FMDlitical agitation, in 
contravention of Article 
A9 of the Geneva 
Convention . " 

This does rxjt mention the scale on which Arab 
inhabitants have thus been expelled from their homes 
and land. Over 800 have t/scn deported since 1967. 
Nor does it bring out ttio uttei^ iUcgality of this 
proceeding. Nor does it mention how flimsy the 
grounds have often been for the Israeli authorities' 
action in expelling a man from his home and country, 
breaking up his household and destroying his 
livelihood. The expulsion of Dr. Hanna Nasr, the 
distinguished and respected head of Sir Zeit College, 
is a case in point. 

B. Other Important Freedoms 

"... freedom of opinion and The Israeli authorities' a^fvr, record in expelling 

expression is relatively leading Palestinian /Xrabs who have the courage to 

uninhibited." challenge and speak out anainst Israel's actions in the 

occupied territories gives the lie to this bland 


"Israel did not interfere 
when, in the second West 
Bank nnunicipal election, 
in 1976 Arab nationalists 
hostile to Israel ran for 
office and in most cases 
won election, and the 
Israeli authorities 
assisted in assuring 
that the election was 
conducted properly . " 

Apparently Israel is to bn given credit for not 
intervening (illegolly err', in contravention of the 
Convention) in the elections. There is also the 
implied sneer that the Arab inhabitants were incapable 
of conducting their elections properly by themselves 
and needed the assistance of the Israeli authorities . 
But much worse is ths suppression of the truth, 
Israel did interfere in these elections by deporting 
two of the candidates (Dr , Ahmad Hamzi Natshi and 
Dr. Abde^-Aziz Haj /^.hrn.„c') on th'? e -e of the election, 
because they were "Arab nationalists hostile to 
Israel". (An Israeli Army spokesman said they had 
been deported on charges of being "ringleaders of 

contd .,,. ,/^0 


- 18 - 

agitation in their towns"). The suppression of this 
fact cannot be due to ignorance since the case becanne 
a cause celebre in Israel . The two men appiealed to 
the Israeli courts against their deportation; but the 
security authorities hastily ejected thenn from the 
West Bank the night before the case was to be heard. 


"Amnesty International's 
1974-75 Annual Report 
included an appeal to the 
Israeli Governnnent to 
ternninate two aspects of its 
administration of the West 
Bank namely, deportation 
and administrative 
detention of prisoners. The 
1975 Annnesty Report on 
Torture included allegations 
of torture in the period 
1968 to 1973." 

The survey does not give any indication whether the 
allegations of torture in the Amnesty report of 1975 
were supported by evidence nor does it mention an 
earlier Amnesty International report of April 1970 
which listed in detail a number of cases where there 
was prima facie evidence of the serious maltreatment 
of Arab prisoners under interrogation in Israel. 
This report received wide publicity (e.g. in The Times 
(Uondon) of 3 April 1970). It produced an outraged 
denial by the Israeli authorities, accompsanied 
however by an uncompronnising refusal to allow an 
independent inquiry into the allegations. 

"A recent International Red 
Cross inspection of prison 
conditions reports a total 
prison population for all areas 
under Israeli control of 
3,000 - 4,000 people, living 
under satisfactory 

As indicated above, this conceals the fact tJ^at the 
Red Cross are not allowed to inspect all places of 
detention and are not allowed to see prisoners until 
eighteen days of "preventive detention" for enquiry 
have elapsed. This is the period in which excessive 
force is most often used. It also omits to mention 
that, as revealed by the Insight i nquiry in the Sunday 

"Over the last nine years, when Red Cross 

repiresentatives have got to prisoners in jails. 

they have heard story after story of ill-treatment 

and torture. " 

contd /19 


- 19 - 

On 10 March 1977 the Red Cross representative in 
Israel told Yediot Aharonot of that date that he had 
found at least some of the prisoners' complaints 
justified . 

In fact, as long ago as September 1970, the 
International Red Cross did draw public attention to 
the likelihood that ill-treatment was occurring during 
the interrogation of Arabs under detention. In its 
report no. 1 14 at that time it said: 

"During the visits, delegates have sometimes 
met detainees whose bodies showed traces of, 
according to the prisoners, ill-treatment during 
interrogations'' . 

"There have been numerous 
reports and resolutions 
adopted in various UN 
forums and in other 
multilateral organizations 
condemning Israeli policies 
and practices in the 
occupied territories. The 
United States has voted 
against adoption of these 
resolutions, which we regard 
as one-sided and politically 
inspired, except when it has 
joined in deploring Israel's 
failure to apply the 1949 
Geneva Convention on the 
Protection of Civilian 
Persons in Time of War . " 

This says much about the State Department's attitude 
to human rights issues. After all the brave talk about 
the universality of human rights and the overriding 
American connnnitnnent to assert without compromise 
these rights, it appears that, after all, circumstances 
do alter cases . In the case of Israel it is not simply 
a question of establishing whether charges of 
violating human rights are true. If they can be said 
to be "one-sided" or "politically inspired", that is 
enough to justify dismissing them. Or as Williann 
Buffum, then Assistant Secretary of State for 
International Organizations Affairs, put in in 1974 when 
he appeared before the House Foreign Affairs 
Subcommittee on International Organizations and 

"It is obviously much easier for us to attach 
special weight to an adverse finding of an 
international body when that finding relates 
to a country with which we do not have a 
particularly close relation" . 

contd /20 


- 20 - 

The reaction of the Government of Israel , whenever public criticism hats 
appeared charging it with violating the human rights of the Arabs living under 
Israeli rule, has been to dismiss the charges as either malevolent propaganda 
or evidence of the gullibility of those making them , This has been accompanied 
by assertions of Israel 's devotion to democracy and freedom . In the document 
here under scrutiny the State Department echoes and endorses this reaction. 

But if Israel's record in these matters is so impeccable, why is it that 
the Government of Israel has so consistently refused to permit any independent 
and impartial enquiry? When the first Amnesty International report appeared 
in 1970, the then Ambassador of Israel in London said that his country was 
justifiably proud of the independence of its judiciary which was "fully competent 
to investigate accusations of illegal behaviour against its citizens" . He went on: 
"How would the British Government react to demands that a 
commission of enquiry composed of foreign jurors be set 
up to investigate allegations of torture or brutality in, say, 
At that time it was pointed out in correspondence in The Times that the British 
Government had in fact already faced precisely that challenge in Cyprus and had 
agreed to an international inquiry under the auspices of the European Human 
Rights Commission. It was also pointed out that the prima facie evidence 
produced in the Annnesty International report was certainly no less substantial 
than that which formed the basis of the complaint against Britain over Cyprus. 
Since then the situation envisaged by the Israeli Ambassador in regard to Ulster 
has in fact happened and Britain again agreed to submit its record in Northern 
Ireland to the scrutiny of the European Court of Human Rights. 

Instead of encouraging Israel in rejecting accusations as "propagandistic" 
and "without foundation" , the State Department would be better advised to urge 
the Governnnent of Israel to follow the example of the British Government and 
submit to an international inquiry. So long as Israel refuses to do so, the rest 
of the world may reasonably conclude that there must be something to hide . On 
the evidence of the document here under scrutiny, it may well also conclude that 
the State Department is more concerned to cover up than to reveal the truth about 
human rights in Israel . 



February 1, 1977. 
Report on the Persecution of the "Black Hebrews" in Israel 


"Black Hebrews" is the name of a minor sect composed of Black people from 
the USA, who believe in the Bible, and in the religious duty of the believers to 
settle in the Holy Land. At the beginning of their arrival in Israel, in 1969, they 
were mistaken for Jews or candidates for conversion to Judaism, and the first 
group was given the right to work in Israel and were allowed to rent flats. After 
a few months, when they have refused to celebrate the festival of Chanuka on 
the ground that it is not mentioned in the Bible, their persecution had begun. 

Periodically the Israeli government attempts to expel them from Israel, first 
whole families were expelled, but after "the scenes" at the airport of the police- 
men struggling with women and children — who shouted to the tourists "We are 
Americans" and waved their USA passports — were shown to be harmful to the 
Israeli "image", the expulsion of the women and children ceased. Nevertheless 
all the "Black Hebrews" live now in Israel for some eight years "illegally" sub- 
jected to periodical ijersecution both from some of the government oflices, and 
even more so from the Jewish population in the few tow^ns in which they per- 
force concentrate, as will be shown below. Indeed their situation resembles very 
closely the situation of those Jews in the Tsarist Russia, who attempted to live 
"illegally" beyond the borders of the "Pale" — the only area in which Jews were 
permitted then to live. 

However there is a crucial difference : A very great number of the Russian 
intellectuals of the XIX century among whom the names of such giants as Tol- 
stoy and Gorky are honourably conspicuous ; and likewise very many of the writ- 
ers, artists and well-known people in other countries, interested themselves then 
in the situation of the persecuted Jew of Tsarist Russia, and protested fre- 
quently against their treatment by the Tsarist government. 

We, here in Israel, suffer from a surfeit of writers and other intellectuals, who 
come here on a sort of pilgrimage, and write profitable books about it, like Mr. 
S. Bellow ; but just as I have yet never heard about a single one of those pseudo- 
pilgrims interesting himself seriously in the plight of the Palestinians, so I 
have yet never heard about one of them saying a word about the sufferings of the 
"Black Hebrews". Nevertheless, the suffering is very real ; some of it will be 
described by two extracts from the recent Israeli press. 

January 7, 1977. 
Extracts From the "Black Hebrews" and the Laws of the State 

(By Meshulam Ad) 

About a month ago, the chairman of the local council of Arad,^ Mr. Shoehet, 
asked the police to do something in order to deal with the tension between the 
local inhabitants (i.e., the Jewish population of Arad. Tr.) and the "Black 
Hebrews." According to Shochet the inhabitants complain of "noise and pain 
caused to them on stairs because of the horrible density of the Black Hebrews." 
According to him some 120 "Black Hebrews" are living in a great density in five- 
six small rented flats. 

The chairman of Arad's local council admits that (in Israel) there are no laws 
against high density of people in flats, but he is very conscious of the great suf- 
fering of the inhabitants who have to live in a neighborhood to flats filled by about 
20 souls of "Black Hebrews" in one flat. 

But the police did not see any reason for an intervention, for those people are 
never involved in any crimes. The spokesman for the Negev police captain Davido- 

1 A township east of Be'er-Sheva, In the Negev. One of the few inhabited by the "Black 


vitz said : "Until now, during so many years, even one liousebrealjer was not 
found among them." 

Tlierefore Mr. Shoehet appealed to (the Israeli) Ministry of Internal Affairs 
and demanded that steps will be taken against those "tourists", whose visa period 
was finished a long time ago. But the Ministry is not very keen to deal with the 
problem. It must be surely aware of the political a.spects, since actual expulsion 
of people with a black skin from Israel, can allow some to put on it a label of a 
racist state. But nevertheless, one can not accuse the (Israeli) Ministry for the 
Internal Affairs of doing nothing, for usually "tourists" of this kind are pre- 
vented of entering Israel, specially if they can not show financial means for live- 
lihood in Israel." 

The ijeople of the sect (of Black Hebrews. Tr.) are working illegally with con- 
tractors and in various plants. Some craftsmen are found among them, and they 
sell their creations — leather purses, jewellery etc. — on the streets of the cities 
and even in the campus of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. They have founded 
a jazz orchestra, which became very famous in Israel and whose profits help the 
sectarians to survive. The sectarians do not pursue luxuries and live austerely, 
and even with this are joyful and always sing dance and play instruments 
together ; and this, specially when it takes place in the evening greatly disturbs 
the repose of the inhabitants. 

It seems to me that a civilized state can not tolerate such a situation, where 30 
persons inhabit one flat and where black children, not admitted to schools (since 
they are illegal tourists. Tr.) receive an independent education, not in recog- 
nized school and not in classes but in the parks and the shelters of the houses. 
Therefore, though the political sensitivity can be understood this problem must 
be tackled decisively. If it is wanted that the sectarians should continue to live 
in Israel, they must be allowed to live in conditions in which they will not be 
health and .social nuisance bothers. And if their living here is not wanted as it 
is illegal, the law must take its course, and they must be returned to where they 
came from. 

We must not resign ourselves to the fact, that those i>eople will continue to 
live in Israel, penniless, and will increase even more the insufferable density 
in the sectarian flats in Dimona, Arad and other places. And though the subject 
is delicate it must be dealt with, for as much as the time passes without dealing 
with it, the problem becomes more severe. 

January 5, 1977. 
Extracts From "The Bi.ack in Dimona Are Not Absorbed" 

(By Mordechay Artzieli) 

(Four (Israeli) Ministers — ^for Foreign Affairs, Justice, Internal Affairs and 
Police — received last week identical letters whose subject is — those Blacks who 
are in Dimona. The identical letters were signed by the Mayor of Dimona, the 
Vice-Mayor, the secretary of the local workers council and the local rabbi (the 
worst racist of them all and the chief incitor against the Blacks, as was usual 
among the Christian priests in many localities against the Jews. Nothing 
changes. Israel Shahak.). 

The letters say that the last period a great tension is felt between the in- 
habitants and the Blacks. The inhabitants of the quarter where the Blacks 
live "have reached a hopeless state, and are leaving the quarter and Dimona 
itself." The reason is, so the letters say, that the shelters of the were 
conquered by force and without permission by the Blacks who use them for 
craftsmen Avork and for their orchestra exercises. 

"The social condition in Dimona is nearing an explosion for the Blacks are 
not content with tlie single quarter in which they lived so far, but attempt to rent 
flats in the other quarters, and sometimes even 30 souls live in one flat of (54 
square meter.s— and this can destroy all orderly life in the quarter concerned." 
The letters finish by .saying that the situation cannot continue and "we see in yoi 


2 The moaninir Is simple : A White USA tourist will not l.e bothered on coniinp to Israel, 
even thouRh he has little money on him. A black one. will be— that Is except if he comes 
on a special trip of "Black notables" shepherded by the U.S. Zionists to see the Israeli 
democracy in action. I. Shahak. 


and in the Israeli government, the responsible ones for this subject, and for every 
unusual or calamitous tiling that will develop in our city because of this" . . . 

The members of the sect do not complain. All Avork and keep themselves alive. 
Their children, prevented to go to school are receiving education in shelters, or 
in the summer in the parks. Yesterday on a wet and cold day I have seen some 
dozen children sitting in a wet shelter and receiving through an improvised 
blackboard a lesson in the geography of Palestine. 

They even do not complain about the horrible density in their flats, in many 
of them the "warm bed" system is employed. This system is the best when four 
or five families must live with their children in one small flat. The sectarians 
attempted to rent further flats in the free market, but the flat owners were 
cautioned^ not to rent their flats to Blacks. Only very few disregard the 
threats and rented their flats to the sectarians . . . 

I think this is quite enough. All government controlled housing and work facil- 
ities are closed before those people. Threats and "'cautionings" are employed 
even to close before them the charity of the few that are charitable. Expulsion 
is ever on their heads, and from time to time grown-up males — the very main- 
stay and working force of the community — are expelled. Is there any country 
in the world now, where Jews are treated in a similar way? I do not say that the 
situation of Jews is ideal in all countries. I am on record in the past, of pro- 
testing, for example against the treatment of Jews in Syria, which has improved 
meanwhile to some extent. 

But it is the height of the modern hypocrisy, that out of so many people, 
specially intellectuals Jewish and non-Jewish, who have concerned themselves, 
and sometimes justly concerned themselves, with the various cases of the 
persecution of the Jews, or of discrimination against the Jews, no one so far, 
has found the minimal courage to raise his voice in support of the persecuted 
"Black Hebrews" in the "Jewash State"! Will anybody be found in the future? 
Israel Shahak. 

Jerusalem, May 5, 1976. 
Eyewitness Testimony 

We, the undersigned Sylvie Garbarz, Eytan Grossfeld and Witold Jedlicki 
hereby declare that we witnessed the following two incidents, both of which 
occurred in the city of Jerusalem, on Monday, May 3, 1976, between the hours 
of 9 and 10 p.m. 

(1) We were on Sultan Suleiman Street, walking toward the corner of 
Nablus Road, when we noticed a strange commotion on and around an army 
vehicle (a middle-sized personnel carrier not covered by any tarp) stationed 
on the opposite side of the street, in the close proximity of Damascus Gate. 
Intrigued by the sight, we crossed the street and approached the vehicle. 
Sitting or standing on the platform of the vehicle there were about 12 uniformed 
soldiers of the Border Guard. Milling around the vehicle there was another group 
of soldiers, of roughly the same number : it included several paratroopers. Lying 
on the floor of the platform there were detainees in civilian clothes. We were in 
the position to see them clearly, but we could not determine their exact number. 
We can state, however, that there were no less than two and no more than 
four of them. The detainees were being beaten, kicked and stomped by at least 
two of the soldiers, relentlessly and with savagery. 

Undersigned Grossfeld promptly identified the commanding officer and ap- 
proached him with the aim of intervening on behalf of the victims. He was rudely 
told to move away from the scene immediately. Undersigned Garbarz pleaded 
with another soldier to stop the beatings ; with the same effect. Another soldier, 
apparently more amicably disposed, explained to us that the beatings were a 
"matter of (venting) emotions." One of the two bystanders, siding with the per- 
petrators of the lieatings, attempted to convince us that "perhaps these Arabs 
planted a bomb". He referred to an explosion which had occurred, approximately 
one hour earlier, in the center of the Jewish part of the city. (Until then, we 
did not know about this explosion.) When undersigned Grossfeld retorted: "but 
perhaps they did not", another bystander said : "So what ; they are Arabs any- 
way". All these exchanges took place in Hebrew. While they were taking place, 
the beatings went on, uninterruptedly. 

= By the rabbi, the ma.vor, the school teacher, the police, et cetera. The comblnerl "caution" 
was nearly 100 percent effective. I. Shahak. 


Once again ordered to walk away by one of the soldiers, we had no choice but 
to obey. We wish to stress that the two mentioned bystanders, whose presence 
could not remain unnoticed l)y the soldiers, were not ordered to leave. We alone 
were, we attempted to intervene. But while walking away, we could 
see that beating went on as the car, for no apparent purpose, stayed put, instead 
of moving towards its destination. 

(2) Some 20-2.") minutes later we were in the Jaffa Gate area. In front of 
Jaffa Gate we noticed, from a distance of about 30-50 meters, a mixed crowd of 
soldiers and civilians. Suddenly, a Border Guard jeep drove up onto the sidewalk, 
and, moving with considerable speed on the sidewalk, approached the crowd. We 
clearly saw a human figure flung by the men in the crowd onto the platform of 
the jeep. Undersigned Grossfeld who was iX)sitioned closest to the scene, saw 
that tlie detainee was covered with blood. Then, imdersigned Grossfeld caught 
sight of the following event. A civilian lifted a piece of cloth from the ground and 
tossed it onto the jeep. A Border Guard soldier on the jeep picked the cloth 
up, pushed it against the detainee's face, and shoved the latter's head rapidly 
backward. We wish to add that in spite of darkness and our distance from the 
scene, the visibility was extraordinarily good, owing to the bright illumination 
of the Old City walls. 

(Signed) Sylvie Garbarz. 
Eytan Grossfeld. 



March 16, 1976. 

A Protest Against the Treatment of the Arabs From the Occupied 
Territories Who Work in Israel 


(By Aryeh Egozi) 

Laborers from the occupied territories are locked in at night in order to 
prevent vagrancy. 

The tragedy that occurred the day before yesterday, in which three laborers 
working in a mattress factory in Tel-Aviv were burned alive, laid bare the 
phenomenon of "Hotels", under jail conditions, in places of work. 

Every evening, the doors of the warehouses — which have turned into im- 
provised living quarters — are locked, and thousands of laborers from the occu- 
pied territories who work in a variety of factories within tlie green line are kept 
within. The doors remain locked until the early morning hours, a short time 
before the beginning of the work day. 

This phenomenon — well known to the police and civilian patrols who make 
the rounds nightly in the areas in which Arab laborers are concentrated — was 
brought to the general public's attention as a result of the blaze that broke out 
the night before last in a small mattress factory in Tel-Aviv. When the fire 
had been extinguished, the firemen rushed into the structure which was com- 
pletely destroyed and found three crenulated bodies. 

A brief investigation brought to light that the victims were young laborers 
from the Gaza Strip, who worked in the factory and slept there at night. 

The Tel-Aviv police district spokesman, superintendent Avinoam Cahani, 
reported yesterday that the police investigation revealed that the three were 
not able to escape from the room in which they were sleeping because the door 
had been locked from the outside. The spokesman added that the factory's owners 
would, apparently, be brought to trial. 

As has been said, the phenomenon of locking the doors of rooms where 
workers from the occupied territories are billeted is widespread and there are 
two main reasons for it. Factory owners must obtain both work permits and sleep- 
ing accommodations for their Arab workers, and they seek to prevent the 
workers — by locking them in — from, needless vagrancy in the streets of the 
cities at night — a thing, according to the directives, that is forbidden. The 


employers know that if a worker, wandering in the streets is discovered after 
midnight, lie will be brought to the police station for investigation. On occasion, 
such a worker is required to remain in the police station until the afternoon 
hours of the following day and that means a loss of work hours. 

In addition, it appears that in most of the cases in which the factory owners 
lock the doors, work permits and sleeping accommodations have not been 
obtained. Since obtaining such permits involves applying to the government 
employment offices, the employer must pay, in addition to the worker's salary, 
various social security payments set by law, payments that, naturally, increase 
manufacturing costs. In order to prevent the discovery of such "underground 
laborers" by the police or by the civilian patrols (who make frequent visits, at 
night, to the industrial areas), it is the practice of factory, garage and small 
workshop owners to lock the doors come nightfall. 

'•I lock the door in the evening and know that in the morning I'll find all 
of them on the premises — and I won't have to run to the police and waste time 
and lose work hours," I was told yesterday by the owner of a small factory 
in south Tel-Aviv who employs four workers from Rafah, each of whom has 
been equipped with the necessary permits. 

A tour of the industrial areas in cities located in the center of the country, 
reveals "hotels" in which workers from the occupied territories reside in con- 
gested quarters, more often than not lacking proper sanitary conditions. 


(Mordechai Avi-Shaul, President of the Israel League for Human and Civil 


"Halt ! Where's your identification? 
Where you comin' from ? Where you goin' ? 
Your papers ! D'ya hear? Your papers ! ! ! ! 
Well, now, you seem to be getting the point. 
You people don't understand regular human talk. 
Stand still, don't move ! 

, put your hands up ! 

Ah-ha, Aywa, Aywa ! You filthy rag ! 

March, you thieves, you murderers ! 

Terrorists ! 

March, jump ! 

Jump, what's wrong with your hearing? ! 

Just you wait, I'll find a way of making you talk. 

You piece of — !" 

Not like South Africa ! There they have a racist regime. The terrain of Israel 
is not like the terrain of Africa. Everything is liberal, democratic — chez-nous. 
Humane. Even though it is "difficult to be both Jewish and humane" as was 
said in an article in "Maariv". 

The continuation will come, down at headquarters or in the jail courtyard. 
Surely there they will open his mouth with brass knuckles. 

The reverberations of the screams of those being tortured at the Dizingoff 
police headquarters reached all the way to the editorial desk of the liberal 
newspaper read by the intellectual community of this nation. Those living adja- 
cent to the headquarters as well as those living further away are horror-stricken 
by the nightly nightmarish events. 

Everyone knows the truth. All the media ppeople know. They know more 
than is being outlined here. They know of the horrors — and only one in a thousand 
writes about them in the newspapers. A voice in the wilderness. A lonely voice 
gagged by the cacophonous chorus of liars demanding "the taking of legal steps 
against those slanderous people". Naturally, only after they've piously rolled 
their eyes heavenward. 

But "the police a'-e absolutely forbidden to beat", said the spokesman of the 
northern district. "We don't beat security detainees and others, and in the event 
of a complaint, the police conducts an investigation to the heart of the 
matter . . ." 

And what of those who have not been either security detainees or others, but 
are just regular Arab workers? You may rest assured. By nightfall they will 
have been transformed. If they come from the occupied territories to Israeli 


settlements and towns in order to earn — through back-breaking work — a loaf 
of bread for their families, to work the land from which they were evicted — the 
land that became the property of the state. Without authorization, they may 
not set foot on state land between the hours of midnight and three a.m., nor 
sleep in a citizen's home. Like the blacks in South Africa. 

And the Arab worker who has managed to obtain work, is tied and bound 
like the Canaanite slaves of old ; and without the generosity and patronage of 
his master, he may not dare even lean on the walls of the town. And should 
it even enter his mind to find a place to sleep in a derelict yard, or near the 
buildings in which he works, he will find him.self arrested on charges of vagrancy. 
And ever so quickly he will turn into a security prisoner. But this is hardly 
raci-sm, perish the thought ! 

A worker who offers his services for work which is not perfectly legal, that 
is for work which has not been authorized by the "liberal" government, is 
preferred by the employer. One doesn't have to pay him so much. He is at the 
mercy of the generosity of his master. He is tethered to his place of work, day 
and night, simply so. 

Come evening, the owner of a business, leaves his office and locks the gate he- 
hind him — a steel gate for added protection. He goes home, caresses his children, 
smiles at his wife, eats dinner in the bosom of his family, enjoys the television 
programs, and hears about the hunt for illegal Arab workers who have prolifer- 
ated in the Negev. He reads in the newspaper about tlie youth from Rafiach 
("Ha'aretz" 1.8.75), a fifteen year-old hired hand, who was beaten to death in 
Lachish by one employer because he fled from him and went to work for .someone 
else . . . He then reads, and a wry grin can be seen at the corners of his mouth : 
those fools, don't they know that Arabs belong in a locked pen . . . with no one 
coming in and no one going out . . . with no theft and no one taking flight . . .? 
He, the liberal and democratic citizen, yawns and has already forgotten ... he 
climbs into his bed and sinks into a pleasant unencimibered sleep. 

"Every evening, the doors of the warehouses are locked, and thousands of 
workers from the occupied territories ("liberated territories" — -M.A.) who work 
in a variety of factories within the green line are kept within. The doors remain 
locked until the early morning hours, a short time before the beginning of the 
work day." 

Is it possible that such barbaric deeds are perpetrated in secret? Or are the 
charming employers afraid that their cruelties will become known to the authori- 
ties, to tlie guardians of the law? Is this possible? Since the subject under dis- 
cussion is only Arab workers, and the pi'ohibition against cruelty to animals does 
not apply to them — who will pay attention to the penning-in of those who are 
without protection and human rights, to those who are without citizen.shlp and 
national standing? The "phenomenon which is well known to the police and citi- 
zen patrol" (my emphasis, M.A.) would not liave merited puhlication in any 
daily newspaper in the state of Israel, had the firemen not discovered three 
charred l)odies among the ruins of a plant that went up in smoke. But the police 
patrols "make the rounds nightly in the areas in which Arab workers are 

What is the difference between Lachish area and Tel-Aviv? To all appear- 
ances, notliing at all. Perhaps the only difference is the form the colonial enslav- 
ing takes and the means by which it is uncovered. In the Lachish jungle, the mur- 
derer is safe, for no law applies to the Canaanite slave. it is none other 
than the "liberal" government whicli has imposed the system of restrictive, rac- 
ist laws on the workers of the con(iuered territories — the refugees and sons of 
refugees; and it is the government which despatches tlie police and the army 
against the workers who dare to spend tlie night in tlie paradise of the Jewish 
settlers who made the wilderness bloom — the wilderness being lands in- 
haliitants were evicted. The pirates of IMtliat Rafiacli who destroyed farms and 
plugged up wells and evicted honest Arab farmers, have risen to great heights 
in Israeli society; they've lieen appointed advi.sers to the government. 

In the Tel-Aviv jungle, the crime is embroidered with intellectual cynici.sni and 
is immersed in a stench of rotting hypocrisy : "The egress door was locked from 
tlie inside", lies the liberal newspaper. (Ha'aretz) 

And all the media, in a chorus of criminal complicity, is busy investigating the 
"causes" of the fire. Arson? An electrical incident? Gas? Combustion of matter 
that caught fire in an electric heater? — "The suspicion regarding the pos.sibility 
of arson has been eliminated" . . . And the human beings who w^ent up in the 


flames? And those who are legally perpetrating these atrocities? What is the 
reason for the sacriliee to Moloch— the ancient god to whom humans were sac- 
rificed at the altar? 

And when will the authors of this filth he brought to trial? The perpetrators of 
the military regime and those who enacted the racist laws? And when will an 
end be put to the colonial slavery on either side of the "green line"? 

March 19, 1976. 
People and Values Go Up In Flames 

(Column of Nathan Dunvitz, Ha'aretz) 

It is unacceptable that Arab workers be treated as were the black slaves in 
the cotton fields of the United States. 

Years ago, I witnessed a scene I shall not forget to my dying day. A fire 
engine and many passers-by were hastening to a store in the Mikveh Yisrael 
street of Tel Aviv. "Aryeh" Taxis now occupies the space. The air was heavy 
with smoke coming from the store and a horrifying scene was taking place 
inside. A man was clasping the latticework of the store and screaming for help, 
while flame.s consumed his body. Within minutes, the man became fire fodder 
and only a scorched body — like a terrible black statue — and the heavy stench 
of scorched meat remained. People froze in place. There were those who burst 
into sobs, women shrieked hysterically. Even if they had come a few moments 
earlier, the firemen could not have rescued the person. The store's exit was 
blocked by flames, and the firemen were not able to saw the latticework because 
the requisite tools were not available then. 

The picture of a man going up in flames will never leave me. At this very 
moment, as I write these lines, the terrible sensation — after many years — returns 
to me. A horrible mixture of hideousness and helplessnass. 

Many young Israelis know this awful scene from the battleflold. Tank crews 
turning into torches ... I don't know whether there is a more horrible vision 
than this. Anyone who has seen such a scene in real life will find diflBculty being 
shaken by the almost-authentic depletion in the film "The Towering Inferno". 

The vision of the human being going up in flames returned to me upon reading 
the nearly-laconic de.scription of the fire in a factory in south Tel Aviv, in which 
three workers from the Gaza Strip found their death. The owner, so it was re- 
ported, was in the habit of locking them, nightly, into the factory which was a 
teetering, fire-trap of a structure — in an area in which many such fires had 
occurred over the years. It was his custom to lock the door with a large padlock 
from the outside, and to go home until the morning hours of the following day. 
He simply jailed them and they were unable to escape their bitter fate. 

My first mental association was of the human being going up in flames. The 
second : the life of slaves. Slavery in Israel. 

Let them not come and claim that this is not slavery; and let them not 
demand a prohibition on writing in this vein for fear of the materials being 
used against us by our enemies. Let it be used. Maybe something will begin 
moving. I am horrified by the thought of what happened, by the fact that this 
could happen at all in this country, and by the knowledge — ^made public after 
the fire — that there are other workers from the territories whose living conditions 
are the same : huts and factory stuotures locked from the outside. Locked in like 
slaves. To prevent them from going out and, heaven forbid, .spending some 
plea.sant time outside; or ijerhaps to prevent them from committing acts of 
.sabotage since the responsibility would fall on those who left them in town at 
night and did not ensure their return home across the green line. 

The moral decline — which manifests it.self in acts of decadence, bribery, life 
lived outside the law, and which from time to time sees the light of day in 
print — this is what is horrifying. When the building boom reached its zenith, 
articles appeared here and there, describing the slave life of the workers in the 
Hebrew cities. Not in those word.s — but the meaning was clear. And nothing 
causetl people to shudder or be horrified except the thought of "what would 
happen if all the Arab workers didn't come to work and the entire economy were 
struck. Who would build our houses? Who would bring the goods to market?" 

The public did not shudder at the announcement — I no longer remember who 
made it — that the workers from the occupied territories are the "hewers of wood 


and drawers of water for Israeli society". Many Israelis saw, with their own eyes, 
markets for the sale of workers forming themselves every morning under thoir 
window sills. They saw the bo.sses bringing members of their villages and towns 
and selling them, in return for a commission, to the Israeli contractor or factory 
owner. And no one was shaken. It was just a portion of the layer of fat and plenty 
that had become part of Israeli life during those years. 

Now the blaze broke out in the factory in Tel Aviv. People were shaken — not all 
of them — for a minute, a day. or maybe a week. And life will return to its regular 
course. And I am willing to bet that workers from the territories will continue 
living where they work or in huts made of tin and wood. In sub-human conditions. 

Maybe, just maybe, an anonymous — or not so anonymous — person will be found 
who will sit down to write of the human tragedy of people being locked in 
nightly, with a big lock on the outside of the door — people who are not considered 
prisoners but workers. In March 1852, an American woman, unknown up until 
then, shook America and the world : Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote "Uncle Tom's 
Cabin" and the world learned of the life of black slaves in the cotton and rice 
fields of southern United States. Maybe someone will be found who will write 
the story of the Tel Aviv cabin. 

As an Israeli, I am mortified by this "phenomenon". See how far we have 

Palestinian Children in the Conquered Territories in 1976 — The Case 
OF Popular Resistance and of Repression 

report to the league for human and civil rights 

(By Attorney Felicia Langer, member of the board of the League) 

The tenth year of the occupation can be appropriately named the year of chil- 
dren's resistance. The generation that "did not know Joseph", consisting of chil- 
dren who in 1967 could be as little as 3 or 5 years old. has not become reconciled 
with the conquest and is determined to pvit up resistance to the Israeli presence 
in their land. Their resistance manifests itself in the form of demonstration.s, 
graffiti, improvised leaflets, sometimes scribbled in handwriting recognizable as 
coming from a school-child, on a sheet torn from a school copybook. Occasionally, 
however, the manifestations of resistance can be more violent, like burning of 
tires or throwing of stones upon the bearers of the "presence" ; i.e., the IDF 
soldiers or the Border Guards. The "shots in the air" with the purpose of killing, 
as well as the numerous casualties of the last year have by and large failed to 
intimidate the youngsters. 

Anybody familiar with the behavior of children and adolescents under any for- 
eign occupation is bound to realize that attempts at their intimidation will not 
work, when their hurt national pride and their frustrations stenuning from total 
denial of political rights are subject to a comparison with the news of liberation of 
other nations which reach the ears of the youngsters recurrently. AVhat is going on 
is the ninth and the hugest of all the tides : so that anybodv with feeling and con- 
science, in particular anybody who still remembers Jewish children as they ma- 
tured in the struggle against the British, is bound to realize that there is no 
solution except to irrant the legitimate riirhts for which the children are strusrgliuEr. 

In the course of the last year, I have followed this tide, as a professional and 
as a human being. I have been watching this generation brought en masse to 
courts and fined for hundreds of thousands of Israeli i)ounds. By law, it is the 
fathers, refugees themselves, who are responsible for delivery of the payments. 
But in the event of their failure, it is the children who go to jail. 

On March 18, 1976, I saw a group of about 20 youths in the military court of 
Hebron. The bruises on their faces and arms bore testimony to the treatment 
they had received from the guardians of the law. One of them had his hand in a 
cast ; another had a badly swollen eye which he could hardly open. The same 
day in the vicinity of the Tomb of Patriarchs, I extricated from the hands of 
IDF soldiers a boy who lost consciousness as a result of blows he received at his 
own home in the course of a meal. We accompanied him to a local hospital. In 
that hospital, I learned that in demonstrations of IMarch 17, dogs were let loose 
against the demonstrators. The doctors lold me. not only of having had to treat 
people bitten by the dog.s, but also of having been themselves beaten by the soldiers 
while trying to provide medical care to the injured in the streets. About this they 
issued a special written statement. 


I will never forget the swollen and bruised face of Jamil Abu-Gharbiyeh, with 
drops of blood falling from his eyes, as he came to my office right after having been 
released from detention at the site of a demonstration. Certainly, evidence was 
not missing when he made his appearance in the court. 

In juvenile court trials in Jerusalem I was defending .several thirteen years 
old girl students from the Kalandia refugee camp, as well as a boy with a hand 
in cast and head in bandage. The boy testilied that his injuries had been caused 
by blows of the policemen. The police witness denied that any beating had taken 
place. The boy was found guilty and fined, with a suspended sentence. The girls 
from the Kalandia camp looked downright grotesque in the .setting of the court, 
when the judge was pontificating about threats which they pose to security and 
about necessities of deterrence. A boy tried on the same day, with whose family 
I am acquainted, was refused bail, due to which he could not see his gravely ill 
mother. She later died while he was still under lock. Finally, fined and with a 
suspended sentence, he went straight from jail to attend her funeral. There he 
saw her, as she was no longer alive. 

These are the lucky ones, entitled to the assistance of a legal counsel. But most 
of the youths are lieing brought to what could be aptly called "field trials" which 
take place at night, in the atmosphere of terror, with no counsel present. Not even 
the representatives of the International Red Cross are able to monitor such trials. 
The youths are crowding the jails to the full capacity. When no room is left, 
they are being transferred to a recently erected lockup in the village of Khawarah 
in the vicinity of Nablus. Thus we can see that all the jails combined together do 
not have sufficient space to accommodate all the protesters against the conquest, 
in particular the juvenile ones. 

About a month ago in Nablus, I met a boy by the name of Franjih El-Massri 
who left the jail after three months of confinement. He told me about beatings 
to which he was subjected. He also told me that he was arrested not at all during 
a demon.stration but at home. From him I learned about his friends Hassan 
Othman and Mahed Abdo, each of which also got three months of confinement and 
a fine of IL8,000. 

In Tul-Karem I defended two boys from Salfid accused of having pulled down 
the Israeli flag from the Salfid police station building, in retaliation against the 
desecration of the Koran in the tomb of the Patriarch by the settlers from Kiriat 
Arba during the last year's Day of Atonement. The youth.s — ^Abd El-Fateh Nazmi, 
Abd El-Fateh and Muhammad Shahin — were lucky to find a considerate judge 
who sentenced each of them to two years of prison, thereof nine months effective, 
even though the prosecutor demanded three years. 

During the same session of the court, an orphan boy by the name of Klaeiri 
Ghanem from the village of Deir El-Gabon was under trial for having raised, 
together with other boys from his village, the Palestinian flag during a demon- 
stration. I submitted that the desire for a flag of one's own should be self-evident 
for anyone who has ever gone through the experience of a struggle for independ- 
ence and freedom. This boy got — from the mentioned considerate judge — "only" 
IL 1,500 of a fine and three months of suspended sentence. The pro.secuting at- 
torney commented that had the boy been tried by a strict judge, as the majority 
are, he would receive a particularly severe punishment, in conformity with the 
attitude of the authorities towards the Palestinian flag. 

Often the soldiers or the Border Guards, of v.hom some may have been hit by 
stones, work off their bad tempers upon Arab passers-by, even thougli the latter 
may not have the faintest idea that a demonstration is elsewhere taking place. 
Something like this I saw two months ago in Nablus. A Border Guard whom I 
met in the building of the military government, complained that his leg had been 
struck by a stone while he was dispersing a demonstration which took place on 
that day in Nablus. "I will smash the bones of anybody whom I see," he screamed. 
An opportunity was not slow in coming. I watched him as he went onto the main 
street, stopped two young passers-by and escorted them to a small check-point 
cubicle. I was in the same cubicle, in the company of a Red Cross representative, 
awaiting the opening of court proceedings. The boys from a near-by village could 
not even understand what was demanded of them. He took their papers, and in 
response to their claim that they knew of no demonstration, he yelled, "They are 
all filthy liars !" It was only due to my intervention and to the presence of the 
Red Cross representative that the boys were left alone. 

Recently the authorities embarked upon new methods of repression designed to 
deter the refugee camp children and adolescents from participating in demonstra- 


tions and even from manifesting in any manner whatsoever their emotions about 
the occupation. The soldiers are now coming to refugee camps, gathering the 
children and youngsters together, hitting them with sticks up to the point of 
making them i)leed, threatening the small children with snakes, calling on fami- 
lies in the middle of the night, and often arresting the children without any 
charge. This is what hapi)ened in the Balatta refugee camp, renamed "Tel El- 
Zalatar", located in the Nablus region. The names of some youths who were thus 
beaten, some of whom were subsequently also brought to trial, are : Mahmoud 
Abd-AUa, Khader Mahmoud, Abd El-Ghani Issah, 16, convicted to one year of 
prison and the fine of IL 10,000 and Ziyad Dajani who got nine months of prison or 
IL 10,000 of fine. 

Included in the last wave of arrests that took place in the proximity of this 
camp were dozens of students. A delegation of mothers came to my office to re- 
quest help from me personally and from the Human Rights League. They described 
to me their children's and their own .sufferings. They told me about Subhi Mah- 
moud Nimr Issah, arrested four times and badly beaten without being seen by 
a magistrate ; about Mussa Halil Shariyeh, 12, arre.sted with the whole group of 
boys aged 11-13. The mothers also told me about how the .students are being trans- 
ferred from their schools to other schools in remote places, .so as to intimidate and 
immobilize them. 

The mothers appeal to our hearts and consciences. They represent thousands of 
mothers in the conquered territories. The list of youngsters from Nablus and 
Ramallah who have been arrested, beaten and tried is appended. Even though 
the list is neither complete nor updated, it is indicative of the scope of the prob- 
lem. It is also indicative of the justice of the cause towards which nobody who is 
truly human can remain indifferent. 


A list of some pupils, with their ages, who were arrested and put on trial in 
two towns only of the West Bank, Nablus and Ramallah. The first 47 pupils are 
from Nablus, the rest from Ramallah. 

1. Abed Almana'am Ra'ab Tibawi, 15 years old. 

2. Bal'al Alazizi, 15 years old. 

3. Samar Muhammad Samaru, 16 years old. 

4. Iman Jusuf Dahar, 15 years old. 

5. Nadal Hassan Zaki Asalan, 15 years old. 

6. Khalil Abed Allatif Sa'ad Aldin. 14 years old. 

7. Taisir Muhammad Qassem Shtubela, 16 years old. 

8. Samar Kamhiya, 15 years old. 

9. Jamal Istaniya, 16 years old. 

10. Nagi Muhammad Jusuf Khaliliya, 16 years old. 

11. Balal Hiron, 15 years old. 

12. Maryan Makhluf, 16 years old. 

13. Majdi Alabar, 15 years old. 

14. Saber Khanidi Sakef Alkayat, 16 years old. 

15. Ahmad Abed Alani Alafari, 16 years old. 

16. Ahmad Fa'iz Khader, 16 years old. 

17. Ibrahim Al'iwi, 15 years old. 

18. Umar Ma fid Abed Alkarim Umar, 16 years old. 

19. Said Walid Mera'i, 16 years old. 

20. Sa'adi Walid Mera'i, 14 years old. 

21. Dawud Mustapha Alsalelibi, unknown. 

22. Zi'ad Khimiad Alshami, 15 years old. 

23. Muhammad Nazar El Bazara, 15 years old. 

24. Khal Zaheir Tabila, 15 years old. 

25. Ju'ad Salim Alkhamad, 17 years old. 

26. Balal Bakr Alkhanbali, 15 years old. 

27. Khamdi Basal Kanafan, 16 years old. 

28. Qassem Suleiman Alshanar, 15 years old. 

29. Khalid Mera'i Ahmad Karkash, 15 years old. 

30. Khamad Ibrahim Alqusa, 16 years old. 

31. Maji Muhammad Jusuf, unknown. 

32. Khani Zaki Alsallan Alafuri, 15 years old. 


33. Jamal Abed El-Ra'uf Ra'ab Fatian, 16 years old. 

34. A'ataf Mustafa Fatian, 15 years old. 

35. Jusuf Ahmad Jusuf Alasa, 15 years old. 

36. Naziya Adal Daruza, 16 years old. 

37. Bishar Bazi Alaskari, 17 years old. 

38. Zulieir Ahmad Albahash, 14 years old. 

39. Bassam Rashid Albahash, 16 years old. 

40. Ma'azan Umar Mahmud Fartaldin, 18 years old. 

41. Ahmad Abed Alani Alaf uri, 15 years old. 

42. Muhammad Na'ayuf Riad Faher Naif, 15 years old. 

43. Fathi Mahmud Ahmad, 16 years old. 

44. Mahmud Darwish Alshashtri, 16 years old. 

45. Mahdi Yatti Abed Alkhak, 16 years old. 

46. Jusuf Ahmad Hassan, 17 years old. 

47. Abed Alkarim Abed Aljalil, 17 years old. 

48. Nur Aldabukh Badawi Sanduka. 

49. Nahada Badwai Sanduka. 

50. Fatkhiya Uda Shahada Muslakh. 

51. Ataf Umar lakub Abu Atiyeh. 

52. Talal Abed Almalik Muhammad Hassan Uda. 

53. Muhammad lyub lakub. 

54. Khamad Kamal Khalil Khamad. 

55. Anwar Munir lakub Alkura. 

56. Nabil Ibramim Khalil Abu Ha. 

57. Abed Alrahim Hassan Khamdan. 

58. Muhammad Umar Alkhatib. 

59. Khalil Jusuf Khalil Alsarati. 

60. Jamal Mahmud Alkhamus. 

61. Muhammad Iman Hassan Mussa Uda. 

62. Jahar Hassni Khasin Aljamal. 

63. Jamal Hassan Ahmad Zaid. 

64. Bassam Sa'adi Ab Qweik. 

65. Ramadan Hassan Ibrahim. 

66. As'ad Muhammad Ahmad Mustafa. 

67. Abdalla Hassan Muhammad Sulama. 

Note. — The particular ages of the Ramallah pupils could not be ascertained, 
but they are all in the age-group of 14-17 years old. Mo'-t of the pupils mentioned 
in this list have been "sentenced" already, by the military courts (usually in 
batches of ten-twenty children at an hour session of the "court"). The usual 
"sentence" is 10,000 Israeli pounds fine. Those suspected of being "agitators" 
receive prison sentence in addition. For comparison the pay of a worker is about 
1500-2000 IP a month, in the West Bank. Until the "sentence" the children can 
spend several weeks, and even months, in prison in the most atrocious conditions. 
Israel Shahak. 

Report on the Oppression in Ramalla and El-Bireh, March 1977 
(Eytan Grosfeld and Dr. Israel Shahak) 


When the prisoners in the Ashkelon Jail have recommenced again their 
hunger strike (after their first hunger strike of 45 days, got the following con- 
cessions from the prison administration : The addition of almonds and combs 
to the list of tlie products tlie prisoners are allowed to buy in the prison can- 
teen) many more organizations and individuals have joined the struggle for 
humane living conditions of the political prisoners in Ashkelon Jail. Against 
the .self-imposed conspiracy of silence of the Israeli press and the silence im- 
posed by the aggressive censorship on the Arab press of East-Jeru.salem, many 
new activities for the prisoners were undertaken. 

So, many tliou.sands of leaflets were distributed, petitions demanding tlie 
immediate satisfaction of the just demands of the prisoners were circulated, 
the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights has published (in Hebrew) a 
special pamphlet in which reports of the lawyers about the condition of the 

20-438 O - 78 - 12 


prisoners were reproduced ; importnat knowledge was sent to many organiza- 
tions and individuals in countries outside Israel. Many were asked for their 
intervention, and several demonstrations, meetings, press-contacts, and pro- 
tests of all kinds were undertaken. Among those, a hunger-strike of three days 
undertaken in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in sympathy with the 
strikers can be emphasized. 

But such protests were not limited to the area within the Green Line, where 
they can be undertaken with relative impunity. Many protest.s — some unknown 
to us — were undertaken in the conquered areas as well. The prisoners of the 
Jenin Ramalla and Hebron-El-Khalil Jails have also struck, both in form of 
hunger-strike and work-strike. 

In the College of Bir-Zeit a strike of the students was held and the Border 
Guards arrived and put the town in a state of occupation. In East- Jerusalem 
seteral demonstrations held by the pupils of the high schools, were cruelly put 
down. The (illegal) committee of the students of Bethlehem University has 
published a statement, and called on all the students to hold a solidarity 
hunger-strike from 9 till 11 March, which was duly kept by all the students 
and the teachers. Somebody has flown the Palestinian flag over the University 
buildings on 10 March and the University was immediately surrounded by 
troop-carriers and by tanks. Border Guards entered the University to take down 
the "illegal" flag and have interrogated — with the attendant "normal beatings" — 
the students and the teachers, as to "who are the agitators". Many other such 
activities could be related. 

This is the background to what happened in Aamalla and El-Bireh, in 
March 1977, to the series of pogroms whose victims were equally the high- 
school students and the elected members of the municipalities. The descrip- 
tion comes partly from the wounded victims lying in the Augusta-Victoria 
Hospital in Jerusalem, and partly from members of the municipality and other 

On Saturday, 5 March 1977, a meeting^ to express the solidarity with the 
Ashkelon prisoners, was held in the courtyard of the Boys High-School "El- 
Hashimiya" in El-Bireh. Some speeches were made, songs were sung by the 
participants, and then the pupils entered the classes to learn as usual. 

On Monday, 7 March, at about 7 in the morning, when the first students had 
arrived in the school, they were surprised to find it surrounded by many Border 
Guards with five troop-carriers. The Border Guards demanded from each stu- 
dent to show them an identification card (if older than 16, otherwise a special 
"student card"). The students, after passing the check, entered the courtyard 
and began to sing freedom songs. The Deputy-Governor of Ramalla Area, Mr. 
Morris, has demanded that they should cease to sing and enter the classrooms. 
When they refused, a profusion of tear-gas grenades was thrown into the court- 
yard of the school. Some of the students threw stones back, and the Deputy- 
Governor ordered his forces to charge. The Border Guards chased the students 
into the classes and threw more tear-gas bombs in all parts of the building. All) 
the students were caught and were, again, made to concentrate in the court- 
yard. They were ordered to sit or to lay on the ground and to put their hands 
on the nape of their necks, while the Border Guards, and the soldiers who 
also arrived, hit them on all parts of their bodies with the clubs with which 
they were provided. 

After this, Mr. Morris demanded again all the identification papers of all 
the students (about 200) in the courtyard, and with their help, he divided the 
students into three groups. 

The first group, of about 20 students, was immediately taken by the soldiers 
into Ramalla Jail. On leaving, the students (whose ages like all the others 
were 14 to 18) were ordered to pass lietween two long rows of soldiers, l)etween 
the courtyard and the street, and each of them was beaten liy the soldiers, 
while the rest of the .students looked on. They are still in the prison, and their 
families were ofl!icially notified that they will spend a month in jail and after 
this another month! Also the families were notified on 9 March, that as an 
additional punishment they will not be allowed to stand for their examinations. 
Many of those students are wounded. 

The second group, of about 75 students, was taken through the streets of Ra- 
malla and beaten on their march through the streets, to the old stables of the 

' It must be remembered that all meetings whatsoever are illegal in the conquered 


Ramalla police station. Those stables have a floor slightly below the ground 
level The floor was flooded with water and the students were compelled to sit in 
the water, and to remain so for the greater part of the day, which was a cold 
one, and then sent home. 

The third group— the remainder— was just beaten up and then sent home. 
The apparent criteria for this selection made by Mr. Morris in ix>rson, were the 
family names of the students ("In your family there is one prisoner" "Your 
familv causes us trouble," etc.). . , , ,. 

During this beating-up and selection, some of the parents arrived looking 
for their sons, and assembled before the school. Many of the students were 
already wounded and from some of them copious blood poured down. When Mr. 
Morris was told about the parents, he ordered the bleeding students to clean 
the blood from their faces and hands. They refused. He then ordered, as a 
gesture, to take five among them to the governmental hospital of Ramalla. Many 
among the crowd of the parents wept when they have seen them, and when the 
first and the second group of the pupils were taken out of the school and beaten-up 
as described above. One of them, a very old man, dared to ask the soldiers and 
the Border Guards not to beat the students, on seeing one of them fainting and 
falling in the street unconscious (of the first group). The Border Guards, in 
response have beaten the old man too, "revived" the fainting boy with further 
blows, and taken also the old man together with the first group straight to 
Ramalla Jail. 

Dr. Azmi Shueibi, a member of the municipal council of El-Bireh, hastened to 
the school on hearing what happens there. He asked to speak to Mr. Morris, but 
instead of being allowed to do so, was publicly beaten-up by a Border Guard 
officer known as "Abu-Talal"," a personage well known in the area, and also 
known to Dr. Shueibi. 

The Border Guards surrounded Dr. Shueibi and by force kept his hands twisted 
behind his back, while "Abu-Talal" repeatedly hit him on his cheek, while cursing 
him in the foulest language in Arabic. After this, Dr. Shueibi was compelled to 
lie on his face in the street, and that Abu-Talal together with other Border 
Guards and soldiers trod on him. until he fainted. He was then dragged into the 
.school courtyard by the Border Guards, by his legs (all this in the sight of the 
crowd of the parents and others) and left to awaken there. Then Mr. Morris 
addressed him ironically saying: "I am .sorry, we have thought that you are a 
student tool" Dr. Shueibi answered: "And if I am a student, .so what! Is there 
any guilt in that?" As a reward of this "impudence," he was beaten by the 
Border Guards again, while Mr. Morris ordered them in Hebrew to beat him up, 
and in Aral)ic not to beat him. 

Some of the teachers had related that on the arrival of Dr. Shueibi, Mr. 
Morris immediately ordered "Abu Talal" : "Beat-up Dr. Shueibi, here he comes !" 
Dr. Shueibi was then freed, and was taken to the hospital, and a certificate 
of the doctors who have attended him is available. After his wounds were at- 
tended to, he went to he municipality building in order to report to the mayor. 
Dr. Shueibi, the mayor, and another member of the municijjality decided to go to 
the school immediately and to help as much as possible.^ However the .school 
was already empty of students, and occupied only by Mr. Morris and some soldiers. 
Immediately on their arrival, the soldiers, prompted apparently by Mr. Morris, 
began to curse the mayor, Mr. Tawil and his companions in Arabic. Mr. Tawil 
was seized, hit on his l)ack and also on his brow where a very visible mark 
remained. Mr. Morris refused to talk with them. 

Mr. Tawil and the councillors went then to the Military Government Centre 
(in Ramalla) and asked to speak with the governor, who was absent. While 
waiting, a phone call from the governor arrived ordering Dr. Shueibi to appear 
before him at 13.00 o'clock. Mr. Tawil, the mayor, was similarly ordered to 
appear before him at 14.30. When Dr. Shueibi entered the governor's ofl^ce — • 
and that governor's custom is to receive his Palestinian callers whi'e putting his 
legs on the table, playing all the time either with his revolver or with his 
"Shabriye" (curved dagger) — he was not allowed to say anything but was just 
told : "You will be put on trial for hitting an officer of Border Guard, Abu-Talal."^ 
It .should be explained that Dr. Shueibi is short and thin, while "Abu-Talal" has a 
most athletic body. Dr. Shueibi was then ordered to leave the room. 

2 An Israeli Druze. It seems that this is a nickname. Tlietrue name is unknown. 

3 The whole process of concentrating the students, the beatings, the selection et cetera, 
took hours. 


At 14.30 all the members of the three municipalities, Ramalla, El-Bireh and 
Deir-Daliiian arrived before the governor's office in order to talk with him about 
the beatings that happened that day. Punctually at that time, Mr. Morris, the 
Deputy-Governor, opened the door of the governor's office, and ordered all the 
assembled representatives, twenty five of them, to leave immediately since it is 
not the pleasure of the governor to see them. One of the Ramalla councillors, 
tried to tell Mr. Morris that they are prepared to wait the governor's pleasure, 
only to be told again to go out. 

The expelled councillors of the three townships decided to strike on the next 
day, Tuesday 8 March, and indeed the municipalities closed down that day. 
The strike was general in all the three cities. On that day some sixty (60) 
students held in Ramalla prison, from former occasions were brought before a 
quick military "trial", if one can use such a word about what actually happens 
on such occasions. There was no formal or informal accusation of any kind. No 
opportunity for any consultation with lawyers or parents was allowed. Each 
student was merely asked "Do you confess?" without being even told about 
what or to what he should confess or what law he has broken. Everyone who 
said "I confess", received automatically a fine of 1,000 IP. Everyone who said 
"I do not confess" received immediately a fine of 2,500 IP. By the way such 
"trials" are now the norm in the West-Bank, so far as youth and children are 
concerned, and indeed happen very frequently. 

On 9 March 1977, the students or Men's Teachers Training Center, near 
Ramalla, held another demonstration of solidarity with the prisoners of Ashkelon 
Jail. Border guards and soldiers, commanded by Mr. Morris, arrived and began 
to surround the building, while some students attempted to escape into the hills 
around it. However some 200 Border Guards were behind the hills in ambush, 
who have begun to chase the students even shooting at some of them, and on 
catching them, beating them up. At least 17 students were seriously wounded in 
the hills, and many others in the building itself, in the beating administered 
under the supervision of Mr. Morris. 18 gravely wounded students were trans- 
ferred into the Augusta-Victoria Hospital in East Jerusalem, and about 20 
wounded students into Ramalla Jail. Eytan Grosfeld has spoken with 12 of the 
students in Augusta-Victoria on 10 March. Here is his description of what he 
has seen and heard : 

"Sights of horror awaited me, when the womided students took-off their 
clothes and have shown me their bodies. The sight of severe beatings were clearly 
visible. The wounded told me the following story, common to all of them. 'The 
demonstration has begun about 9 15. After the Centre was surrounded by troop- 
carriers, then about 10.00 some five tear-gas bombs were shot into the centre 
and the soldiers and Border Guards charged-in. Some students escaped into the 
hills and have found there another unit of soldiers. The students who were 
caught, were beaten by clubs specially on their heads, hands and feet (many 
of the students have a hand or a leg broken). A special attempt — which was 
quite successful — was made to break their teeth. 

After the beating, the soldiers took-off the students' belts, bound them in 
threes with the belts and dragged them into the specially prepared concentration 
place. There they were told to lie down and beaten again. A major who has 
arrived there, ordered bis soldiers, not to l)eat further one of the students who 
has lost much blood, saying that he is afraid lest he will die, and even took off the 
student's shirt to staunch the blood from his head. At the same time another 
student was dragged towards him bound with his belt and was beaten up. Since 
not much blood flowed, the major did not interfere in this case. 

Many officers and soldiers continued to beat up the bound students, attempt- 
ing, and succeeding in many cases, to break-up the bones of their hands. 'Abn 
Talal' was one of tlie successful ones. He had personally broken the hand of 
one of the students, and wrenched-out the joints from their socket of the other 
hand, as was confirmed by the x-ray photograph. Some .soldiers wanted to .shoot 
a tear-gas l>omb into the l)ound students group, but 'Abu Talal' ordered not to 
do this, and instead continued with others, the beatings, saying to the soldiers 
'If you will not break-up those hands that had thrown stones. Morris will not 
be content.' When told by one of the students that both his hands are broken 
already, he began to smash his leg. 

The students were held bound in that 'concentration place' for more than an 
hour. During that time another officer arrived, identified by the soldiers as 
their commander. He inspected the students and observing 3^ of them bleeding 


from their heads, he ordered not to beat them any more on their heads, but to 
continue to do so on their legs and hands. One of the soldiers pointed out with 
Ills finger at one of the students saying 'He hit back at me'. The officer then 
personally administered a beating to the student who was pointed out. Then 
under his supervision, the students were ordered to lie with their hands out- 
stretched while the soldiers began to hit them with clubs, on their hands. Some 
ten clubs were broken in this process, but reserve clubs were prepared before- 
hand. When a soldier got tired, another took his place, and everything was done 
as a game, with accompanying laughter and jokes. After this treatment lasted 
some time, the method was changed and the students were beaten by the butts of 
the rifles on their bellies and their private parts. Some were dragged by hair. 

Finally the students were ordered to go into the troop-carriers, bound still by 
their necks one to another, by belts or by thick ropes, while the soldiers ordered 
them by expressions used ordinarily in Palestine to speed-up sheep or camels. 
Some were incapable of going in — they were further beaten until they have 'suc- 
ceeded' to climb the vehicle. 

One of the students was so horribly beaten-up in this process that his com- 
rades have put him in a corner and defended him with their own bodies, so that 
he will be beaten less — for the beating continued inside the troop-carriers. One 
of the soldiers, went up to him, found him fainting and announced that he will 
die. The rest of the students were ordered to sing in the troop-carriers. The 
Border Guards sang too — "Yalla, Beitar, Yalla" ^ Every second "Yalla" was 
accompanied by a concerted hit with clubs on the bound students. When the 
students refused to sing they were beaten more, and also ordered to thank the 
Border Guards for the beatings, or to curse Allah or the Prophet Muhammad. 
One of the students was specially beaten when it was perceived that he under- 
stands Hebrew. Another who shouted too loudly when his tooth was broken 
by a club, was hit on his head and suffers from concussion. 

On arrival of the troop-carriers in the courtyard of the Military Government, 
the officers and the soldiers came out to congratulate on the successful opera- 
tion. The students were ordered to stand against one of the walls of the court- 
yard, and there all their watches were systematically smashed-up, and they were 
compelled, each of them to say 'thank you' after the smashing-up. One of them 
tried to put his wat<?h in his pocket, but was compelled to take it out again, to put 
it on his hand, in order to be smashed on the hand in a proper way. The beatings 
continued even there. One of the students was signaled there by 'Abu-Talal' for 
a special beating-up on his testicles 'In order that you will be incapable to bring 
forth any more Palestinian children', as he 'explained'. Then the students were 
allowed to sit down on the ground on condition that they will never raise their 
heads up. They then received a pail of dirty water with rags used to clean the 
floor and were ordered to clean themselves by these. On asking for water to drink, 
they were told to drink the same water. Also technical hydrochloric acid (called 
'fire water' in spoken Arabic) diluted with water, was given to them for the 
purpose of the disinfection of their wounds. 

At that time three girl-soldiers, arrived from the governor's offices to see 
the show, laughing and joking. To make the sight more funny, the girls asked 
the soldiers to order a student, with help of a beating, to raise one of his legs and 
to keep it so, or to stand on one leg or to take another funny posture. Those 
requests were fulfilled, and the students were compelled to carry them out. 

Here let me give a story of one of the students, who got a completely individ- 
ual treatment. He left the Centre l)efore the demonstration had begun and went 
up the street into the town. From one of the arriving troop-carriers a tear-gas 
bomb was throwni on him and on a small boy, of about the age of ten (10) years, 
who passed. Both fell on the ground. Soldiers arrived from the troop-carrier and 
beat-up both, but only the student was taken to the troop-carrier, where his 
blood dirtied the floor. This made the soldiers very angry and they beat him up 
further for this 'crime' and compelled him to clean the floor. The troop-carrier 
went up with the captive to the police station of Ramalla, where the police of- 
ficer in charge demanded to stop the beating, since the student has lost much 
blood. He was then transferred to the courtyard of the Military Government 
Centre, where he joined the others. 

After a time in the courtyard, a military doctor arrived who asked the soldiers 
to stop the beatings. He was not obeyed and he has left. Afterwards the director 

* "Beitar Jerusalem" a favourite football team connected with the Herut Party. 


of the Men's Teachers Training Centre arrived. Mr. Morris went out to him, 
and the very first thing, threatened him, that if he will dare to notify journalists 
of what happened, the Centre will he closed. Morris was very angry when the 
director proposed to take the wounded into hospital, and said that only first- 
help is what they need, and afterwards they should be put in prison. But after 
a further insistence by the director who is an UXRRA official, he agreed to 
allow to take some of them to hospital. A 'test' was arranged immediately, by 
Morris, as to who of the students really needs ho.spitalization, wliich consisted of 
the 'ability' — as judged by Morris — of a student to raise his hands behind his 
head. Those, who when doing this exercise, were judged by Morris to be 'really 
ill', were allowed to go to an UNRRA bus. whicli has arrived, but only after 
Morris assembled them to hear a lecture which was : 'So they have inflated you 
(for by this time most of them were swollen) ? You have enough now.' Then the 
bus brought them to hospital. 

All the wounded have on their backs horrifying scars, caused by clubs. Gen- 
erally the scars resemble two sides of a triangle, since most students were beaten 
simultaneously by two soldiers, one on the right and one on the left side, while 
being compelled to bend, or to lie on the ground. The color and swelling is specially 
terrible where the two sears meet. A common scar is about 20 cm. long, 2-5 cm. 
broad, red. with shades of blue or violet or yellow on the sides of it. Of the many 
wounded inspected (both in Augusta-Victoria and other places by both the 
authors ! ) we do not remember one single person who did not have such .scars — 
apart of other wounds of course, which vary — which in our opinion shows train- 
ing and prior orders. 

In addition many can show similar scars, which however caused greater 
physical harm on the sides of their bellies, on their shoulders and on their necks. 
It seems to us that the average number of .scars on each person's back is about 
ten (10) arranged as explained. Many other wounds were already bandaged, of 
course. Enormous swellings appeared on the hands and on the feet (of those 
whose hands were not broken). It could be seen that a special effort was made by 
the soldiers to hit the right hand more than the left. One of the students has 
both of his legs and his hands broken so he cannot move at all, not because of 
concussion but because of broken bones. He was one of those beaten by 'Abu- 
Talal' personally. He is also wounded in his testicles. Another has his elbow 
opened up to the bone (as the nurses and the doctors who bandaged him told 
me). The 'ordinary' broken bones are too many to describe." So far Eytan 

During the whole week following 9 March, similar treatment was given not 
only to students, but to the grown-up population in the whole area of Ramalla. 
For example : On 10 March, at 10.00 o'clock. Border Guards commanded by Mr. 
Morris attacked the Refugee Camp El-Amari, in the southern part of El-Bireh, 
because, so Mr. Morris claimed, somebody has thrown a stone on a passing 
Israeli taxi. People were taken out of their houses, mostly males, "concen- 
trated" and beaten-up exactly as described above. One wounded man from this 
"operation" is hospitalized in the Ramalla Hospital. Immediately when people 
heard about this, pupils from all the schools in the area had begun to fly to 
their homes. 

Many other instances of such operations both in the towns and the villages of 
Ramalla area could be given. But .since they were the same basically as those 
descriibed above, we will only describe two operations in which there is an ele- 
ment of novelty. 

On 16 March, some 150 parents of high school students were ordered to come to 
the Military Government Centre in Ramalla, with their children. On their 
arrival at 1400 o'clock, their identification cards were taken from them, and 
they were ordered to sit on the ground in the parking-lot of the Military Govern- 
ment Centre from 1400 to 2400, and then were dismissed home — without their 
identification cards. It so happened, that very many people from villages around 
Ramalla were invite<i' to the Military Go^-eniment on that day, and officers or 
clerks used to take them out and to show them the waiting guarded crowd of 
parents and children, saying "This happens to the people we do not like". Many 
old and ill people among the detained parents — including an old aunt of the 
mayor of Ramalla, Mr. Karim Khalaf — were not allowed to leave In spite of their 
sufferings. On 17 March, when the girls of the Ramalla High School sang songs, 
a unit of Border Guards entered the classes and threw ga.s-bombs, of an appar- 
ently new kind which caused prolonged nausea in addition to the usual weeping, 
etc. More than forty (40) girls needed hospitalization. 


We should also remark that the number of the wounded, is much greater than 
the number of those hospitalizetl ; since those of the i>eople who succeed to escape 
the soldiers or the Border Guards are afraid even to visit a hospital, knowing that 
the Military Government inspects the hospitals during such i^eriods as described, 
and everyone who will be discovered there with signs or scars of a beating, will 
be imprisoned. 

Finally, as a sign of how much this reality, or small portion of it, is perceived by 
the Israeli "public opinion", we will finish with two apparently inirelated 
quotations : 

In Ha'aretz of 18 March 1977 Dr. Aninon Cohen, the Chairman of the Depart- 
ment for the History of Islamic Countries in the Hebrew University of Jeru- 
salem, has written in an article about the PLO : "The process of the normaliza- 
tion of the relations between the inhabitants of the areas ° is not liked by the 
PLO." It must be understood that for all the Zionists, and specially for their 
"Arabists", or specialists for Arab or Islamic Affairs, what happened in Ramalla 
is "a process of normalization." 

In Ha'aretz and Jerusalem Post of 14 March, the Israeli Council for the 
Israeli-Palestinian Peace published an advertisement claiming that Faruk Qad- 
dumi hinders the peace. It .sliould be emphasized that neither this body of cheats 
and hyprocrites, nor any one of its members has said in public one word about 
what happened in Ramalla and El-Bireh. From this one can draw the conclusion 
that in their opinion, neither the military governor of Ramalla Area, nor his 
deputy MorrixS, nor the one in charge of territories Mr. Skimon Peres, and of course 
not the beatings (which for them do not exist!) hinder the peace, but only what 
Mr. Qaddumi said or did not say. It is because those disgusting hypocrites, par- 
ticipate in the conspiracy of silence, ordered and organized by the Israeli govern- 
ment, that they can boast of their "good relations" with this government of 
sadistic oppressors. We, on the other hand, boast, that in these difficult times, 
we are not silent when children are beaten because they desire freedom and 
struggle for it ! 

Violations of Human Rights in the West Bank : Report by a Swiss League 
FOR Human Rights Observation Mission, Undertaken June 26 to July 2, 1977 

In going to the West Bank, our delegation had no other purpose but to form 
a concrete idea concerning the situation of the inhabitants of the occupied terri- 
tories. Therefore, our objective here is not to develop theories or make legalistic 
or political evaluations, but to re-state, as faithfully as possible, the evidence 
collected by us and the observations noted. 

If the great similarity in the evidence gathered has led to some generalizations 
on our part, the reader should take note that the present report is no more than 
an account of facts that have been described and verified. 

We have categorically rejected cases of isolated testimony, assertions lacking 
certainty, developments uncorroborated by actual and verifiable facts, and we 
have only retained the facts that we ourselves were able to observe, or those con- 
cerning which we heard testimony and which we were able to verify by cross- 
checking the evidence several times. 

Thus, we were forced to discard important information which we were not in 
a position to verify. 

If the present report contains practically no names of persons, the reasons 
are quite obvious and are due to our concern for the safety of our witnesses ; 
nevertheless, our delegation has retained only evidence submitted by persons 
whose identity was known to it. 

We draw the reader's attention to the fact that the pre.sent report concerns 
itself only with the situation affecting human rights in the occupied West Bank, 
and not with the situation in Israel proper. 

We have adopted United Nations terminology insofar as the term "occupied 
territories" is concerned, as well as with regard to the appropriate vocabulary 
used to describe the situation of the Palestinians living in the West Bank. 

west bank municipalities 

Our delegation was able to talk with various municipal officials in the towns 
of West Jordan ; in particular, it was received by the mayor of Jericho, the mayor 
of Ramallah, the mayor of El-Bira and the deputy mayor of Bethlehem. 

'' That is the conquered areas. 


From these conversations, the following stands out : 

1. The authority of the mayors of Arah towns in the West Bank extends only 
over municipal questions, the real power being in the hands of the Israeli mili- 
tary governor. 

2. The municipalities have practically no funds to dispose of, except for the 
assistance extended for social ends by various Arab states. Additionally, it 
should be emphasized tliut entry into Israel of such funds is extremely diflScult, 
and that substantial sums are lying dormant in Jordanian banks, awaiting the 
possibility of being transferred to municipalities in the West Bank, if authoriza- 
tion can be obtained from the military authorities. 

3. The social infra-structure is largely missing and the municipalities lack the 
means of ac(iuiring the necessarj- equipment. To cite an example, the town of 
Bethlehem (population 35,(K)0) has no fire-tighting vehicles. 

4. The mayors are often denied permits to leave the occupied territories, even 
to respond to invitations from foreign countries or municipalities, or to travel 
abroad to raise funds for assistance. It is to be noted that the majority of towms 
in the West Bank are "twinned" with foreign towns and that the occupying 
authorities proliibit exchanges between the twin localities. 

5. The function of mayor or that of municipal counsellor does not provide im- 
munity, for those who hold it, against arbitrary arrest, pressure of all sorts or 
even deportation. The same applies to candidates for office in municipal elections. 

6. During the period when the now-occupied territories were under Jordanian 
sovereignty, the mayor who has inherited ancient traditions exercised the custo- 
mary power of conciliating or settling family disputes. This judiciary function 
has been abolished by the occupying power. 


From various depositions, as well as on-the-spot observations which we our- 
selves were able to make directly, it is evident that expropriation of numerous 
houses or of land owned by Arabs is a current practice in the West Bank, and is 
of such magnitude as to lead one to think that the underlying motive is a political 
one, that is confiscation, pure and simple, of the occupied territories by the Israeli 

The following examples may be cited : 

1. An inhabitant from Bethany found himself notified by official letter of tlie 
expropriation of his land against indemnification. No useful pu))lic service was 
cited as the reason for the act of expropriation. He was left with no choice but 
to either accept it, and to risk being regarded as a traitor in the eyes of his 
compatriots, or to refuse it as more and more Palestinians are doing. 

2. For over three months, the village of Deir Abu Mishal, the geographic loca- 
tion of which is strategically important, has been the target of violent incursions 
by Israeli troops, who shoot automatic rifles into the air and break windows and 
doors. The terrorized inhabitants, who seek refuge on the rooftops are iniable to 
sleep at night and are forced to rest a few hours during the day, which puts them 
in a state wherein they are unable to pursue their daily chores. The obvious ob- 
jective of this operation is to coerce the inhabitants into evacuating the village, 
or to justify using force to evict them should they react violently to the nocturnal 
raids by the Israeli troops. 

3. A neigliborhood of Arab houses, situated between Jericho and tlie Jordan 
River, was occupied by the Israeli Army in 1967, and again in 1973. During tlie 
latter occupation, the Israeli Army totally destroyed the interior of the houses, 
even carrying off the furniture, leaving nothing in place except walls and roofs. 
All the inhabitants liave departed, fearing a renewed occupation. 

4. In the proximity of the town of Ramallah. the Army has taken over a 
hill which abuts the water reservoir belonging to the town of El-Bira. 

5. Starting at Bethlehem Hill, the view of the Old City of Jerusalem, encircled 
following expropriation J)y buildings constructed for Jews only, is indicative of 
the determination of tlie State to retain the West Bank. 

6. Near Hebron we visited the town of Quiryat Arba, which i(s typical example 
of the Jewish settlements establii^hed in the West Bank. 

7. Several i>ersons confirmeil to us, by citing precise cases, that not only have 
lands and houses been confiscated, but many houses in the occupied territoric's, 
owned by people who have been arrested or who were suspected of sympathiz- 
ing with Palestinian organizations, have been demolished since 1968. 


The various facts cited above, as well as observations made by the United 
Nations, attest to the State of Israel's determination to appropriate or annex 
the occupied territories. 

In particular, the objective of the expropriation, the confiscation and the 
demolition of houses is to coerce the inhabitants into lea-ving the West Bank. 


In light of the numerous depositions gathered by our delegation, it is in a 
position to affirm the following with regard to detention of Palestinian prisoners : 

1. In extremely frequent cases, the crowded conditions in prisons reach 
dramatic proportions ; detainees are iso crammed together that, for lack of space, 
they cannot stretch on the floor to sleep. As an example, Ramallah Prison 
houses 200 inmates, of whom 10 percent may be described as common law 
prisoners, although its capacity does not exceed 40 inmates. 

2. Several detainees have been driven to insanity under the effect of torture 
practiced on them before or after their trials. 

3. Arrested persons are not allowed to be in touch, either with their families or 
their lawyers, so long as their interrogators remain unsatisfied with the 
statements obtaine<l from them. We encountered families that remained for 
weeks ignorant of the whereabouts of some of their members. 

4. Serious discrimination exists between Jewish and Palestinian detainees. 
For example, in Beersheba Prison : Jews have beds while the Arabs must 

sleep on the bare floor ; Jews receive 4 visitors a month, while the Arabs receive 
only 1 ; Jews may use 10 blankets, while the Arabs can only use 5 or 6, imrticu- 
larly during the rigorous winter months. 

5. Medical and dental care are almost non-existent, or often too late, because 
a detained person must inscribe his name in a list for a visit, and then await 
his turn to see the doctor or dentist — usually several days later, or even weeks. 

e. Imprisoned children and students have no possibility of pursuing their 
studies in prison. However, the families can, in the meantime and as a general 
rule, send them books through the sole intermediary of the Bed Cross. 

7. We gathered a great deal of evidence on cases of detention lasting several 
months, without interrogation, a trial or sentence. 


On June 29, 1977, one of us — Me. Moutinot — was accorded the opportunity of 
witnessing the trial of four Arab youths before a military court which met at Lod. 

The facts, acknowledged by all, were as follows : four young Arabs, aged 16 
to 17, had prepared six bottles filled with gasoline, which they had intended to 
hurl at the Jews. In fact, they only threw two bottles, which caused minor wounds 
to two Arabs. 

The charges against the defendants, according to the 1945 Emergency Defense 
Act promulgated by the British, were : 

1. Military training : punishable by a seven-year prison sentence. 

2. Preparation of explosive devices : punishable by a life sentence or death. 

3. Transporting explosive devices : punishable by a life sentence or death. 

4. Hurling explosive devices : punishable by a life sentence or death. 

The court Avas composed of three judges, of whom one only had had a legal 
education ; two of the judges were lieutenants and one a major. 


At 9:.50 a.m., the four defendants were brought into the hall handcuffed to 
each other. The handcuffs were removed as soon as they were seated in the dock. 

The trial took place inside a military camp. Thirty .seats, allotted to the public, 
were practically all occupied by relatives of the defendants. 

About a dozen armed soldiers from the military police stood guard Inside 
the hall. 

A military interpreter sporadically translated for the benefit of the defendants, 
from Hebrew into Arabic. The proceedings were conducted entirely in Hebrew. 

The dossier, which was a very thin one, contained mainly the confessions of 
the defendants, in Hebrew, a language which the said defendants neither speak 
nor understand. 


The language of the document reflects the foregoing: phrases such as "I am 
a terrorist" are put into the mouth of a defendant who would never have used 
such terms, but rather would have said something like "I am a fighter for the 
liberation of Palestine." 

The personal dossier is almost nonexistent, except for a brief curriculum vitae. 

Tlie defendants were interrogated by the court. The only witnesses were the 
security agent, who had taken down their confessions and who aflBrmed that the 
defendants made the statements which he had recorded of their own free will, in 
addition to the father and uncle of each of the defendants, who testified as to the 
good character of the youths. 

In an indictment lasting five minutes, the prosecution called for "a severe 
penalty." The defense, undertaken by Me. Lea Tsemel, pleaded for 30 minutes, 
asking for the indulgence of the court in view of the youth of the defendants. The 
defense introduced the expert opinion of a chemist who demonstrated that the 
bottles were not explosive, but rather incendiary devices ; .she insisted that the 
four charges against the defendants sprang from one and the same act. 

The session was adjourned at 12 :15 p.m. for lunch and for deliberation by 
the court. 

It returned at 14 :15 and the four defendants were pronounced guilty of all the 
charges, the verdict being as follows : 

1. One of the defendants was sentenced to a 6-year prison term of which 2 
were su.spended. 

2. Two of the defendants were sentenced to 5 years of which 2 and a half were 

3. The last defendant was sentenced to 2 years of which one was suspende<l. 

It is noteworthy that there is no ijenitentiary in Israel for youthful offenders, 
at least in.sofar as Arabs are concerned, and during their period of detention, all 
the defendants had been raped by their co-detainees. 


The defendants were apprehended on April 3 and 4. Three of them were 
arrested in school. All were beaten and brutalized by interrogators from the 
security forces. 

It is relevant to state that the inquiry is conducted entirely by the police 
without any legal supervision, or the right of resort to legal aid. 

The attorney may not see his client except after he has confessed, which 
happened in tliis case, on April 17, 1977, approximately two weeks after the 

It would be pertinent to point out that the 1947 Emergency Defense Act was 
passed by Great Britain during its struggle against the Jews, who at that time 
described it as "Nazi-like, inhumane and contradicts all human right.s" and that 
currently they are enforcing this same law against the Palestinians. 


We have gathered concurrent testimony from former prisoners, attorneys, 
prisoners' families and from members of municipal authorities, attesting to the 
fact that the of torture in the West Bank is a systematic practice. 

Following is a list of the different forms of torture practiced on persons 
previously apprehended by the occupying authorities. It is not an exhaustive one, 
and includes only the forms described to us as the most common. 

Locations irJirrc torture takes place 

1. Sarafand (near Tel-Aviv) 

2. Hebron 

3. The Russian Compound (near Jerusalem) 

It appears that if torture is a common practice, these three locations are, sad 
to say, famous as centers that specialize in the use of torture, as we were told 
by numerous prisoners. 

Forms of torture. 

1. Burning by applying lighted cigarette butts to any part of the body. 

2. Using irritants (powders or sprays), which cause itching or sharpen the 
pain brought on by other forms of torture. 

3. Beatings by sticks, canes or bludgeons. 


4. Electric shocks applied to all parts of the body, especially and particularly 
to sensitive parts (ears, genitals). 

5. Forcing bottles or other objects up the rectum or the vagina. 

6. Pulling finger nails. 

7. A form of torture known as "the water drop." which consists of causing a 
drop of water to fall at regular intervals, and for hours on end, over an indi- 
vidual who cannot escape it. This form of torture frequently leads to insanity. 

8. Exposing an individual, in the nude, to full sunlight for hours on end. 

9. The so-called balance torture, which consists of balancing an individual 
for hours on end, either by strapping him to a swing or by suspending him. 

10. The so-called "tiger cage," which con.sists of locking the individual inside 
a cage too small for standing up or for stretching, so that he is forced to crouch. 
The Hoor of the cage may be encrusted with sharp spikes. 

11. Depriving an individual of sleep for several days. 
12 Suspending by the feet or hands. 

13. Plunging an individual in an icy bath, then plunging him in a boiling one, 
and repeating the process. 

14. Locking the individual inside a place with wild dogs and cats. 
ir>. Prolonged and systematic use of lacrimatory agents. 

16. Forcing an individual to lap his food directly off the floor. 

These forms of torture are used mostly to obtain confessions from the ap- 
prehende<l person, and they continue for as long as necessary until the desired 
statement is obtained. Equally, these forms of torture may be practiced with 
the simple of breaking the tortured person both physically and morally. 

It is relevant to note, as the above demonstrates, that when conditions during 
detention are particularly bad, they tend to be the equivalent of torture. 


West Bank inhabitants cannot move freely from place to place. The following 
situation prevails : 

1. Even within the West Bank itself restrictions on movement can be found, 
either through forced residence inside a given area or, in a more general way, 
by making moving to another place subject to authorization. 

2. Several persons, especially mayors of Arab towns, complainetl to us that 
they were denied permits allowing them to travel abroad, even if such travel 
was to be undertaken in response to an invitation from abroad. 

3. It can happen also that certain persons may receive permits to leave the 
country, along with an interdiction prohil)iting them from returning to the West 
Bank. " 

4. We were even apprised of cases where certain persons were escorted to the 
frontier, without hoi>e of return ; in particular, two Arab doctors were arrested 
and taken during the night to southern Ivebanon by helicopter. 

5. Travel between .lordan and Israel via the AUenby Bridge bas been made 
difficult by the very fact that travelers must pay a high tax. 

6. This measure hinders families separated by the frontier from seeing each 
other often enough, if tbey happen to lack the necessary financial means. 

7. Msits abroad are encouraged if the person does not wish to return to the 
West Bank, but they are prohibitetl if the voyage is simply a round trip. This 
latter policy favors emigration by prohibiting contacts with the outside. AVe are 
aware of the case of a young student who obtained a iiennit to travel to the 
Unitefl State.s. To return to his homeland, he was required to make the trip back 
within a year, something he was unable to do. He was not allowed to rejoin his 


Our inquiry leads one to the conclusion that the occupation of the West Bank 
has brought al)out repeatetl violation of the provisions of the Universal Declara- 
tion of Human Rights. 

1. The numerous arbitrary arrest.s, prolonged cases of detention without legal 
supervision, and the dei>ortations are flagrant violations of the provisions of 
Article 3 of the Declaration. 

2. Cases of enforced residence, serious restrictions on border cro.s.sing, and 
prohibiting certain Palestinians from returning are all violations of the provi- 
sions of Article 13, which guarantees the right of free movement and of free 


choice of residence and which stipulate in particular that "Everyone has the right 
to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country." 

3. The numerous violations of property rights, such as arbitrarj- expropriation, 
the prohibiting of construction, and the demolition of buildings are inconsistent 
with the provisions of Article 17 of the Declaration, which guarantees the right 
to property and stipulates that "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his 

4. Toi'ture is commonly and systematically practiced, in contradiction of the 
principles of law, and in particular Article 5 of the Universal Declaration. 

5. The flagrant inequalities between .Jews and Arabs in the West Bank are in 
contravention of Article 2. Paragrapli 2, which stipulates that "no distinction 
shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of 
the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, 
trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty." 

Finally, our delegation cannot but feel concern A\ith respect to the right to a 
nationality, cited in Article 15 of the Declaration. In effect, the very state of an 
occupied territory results in the denial of a nationality to its inhabitant. 



3 9999 05995 288 5